MCOLES State Licensing Practice Exam

What does South Dakota v. Opperman state about inventory searches?

1. They are always unreasonable

2. They can occur with pretext of investigatory motives

3. They follow standard police procedures if not pretextual

4. They require a search warrant

The correct answer is: They follow standard police procedures if not pretextual

The case of South Dakota v. Opperman established that inventory searches may be deemed reasonable as long as they are conducted in accordance with standard police procedures and are not being performed for investigatory motives. This ruling emphasizes that inventory searches serve a legitimate purpose, such as safeguarding the owner’s property while it is in police custody and protecting the police from claims of lost or stolen property. When inventory searches are executed following standard protocols, they fall within the legal boundaries set by the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Such procedures typically involve documenting the contents of a vehicle before it is impounded to ensure that any items present are noted for accountability and protection. Therefore, the process must be systematic and applied uniformly to reinforce their reasonableness. Since these searches do not require a warrant when conducted according to established policies and procedures, it clarifies their legitimacy compared to other forms of searches that would necessitate a warrant or probable cause.