What Is an Inventory Search and Why Do Judges Suppress Them?

When police tow a vehicle after an arrest or traffic stop, they often perform what’s called an inventory search. On paper, this search is meant to protect the owner’s property and shield the police from false claims. In practice, however, inventory searches are among the most frequently litigated and frequently suppressed searches in Massachusetts.

Judges are particularly vigilant because an inventory search—if misused—allows police to bypass the constitutional requirement of probable cause. This post explains what an inventory search is, when it’s lawful, and why courts so often rule that police crossed the line.

1. What Is an Inventory Search?

An inventory search is a non-investigative search conducted by police after a vehicle is lawfully impounded. The purpose is:

• To protect the owner’s property

• To safeguard the police from false claims of lost or stolen items

• To ensure officer safety by identifying dangerous objects inside the car

Crucially, an inventory search is not supposed to be used to look for evidence of a crime.

2. When Are Inventory Searches Legally Valid in Massachusetts?

Massachusetts courts impose strict requirements on inventory searches. A valid search must satisfy all of the following:

A. The vehicle must be lawfully impounded.

Police cannot simply decide to tow a car because they want to search it. There must be a legitimate reason—such as:

• No licensed driver available

• Vehicle obstructing traffic or posing safety issues

• Arrest that leaves the car unattended

If the decision to tow the vehicle was improper, the inventory search automatically collapses.

B. Police must follow a written policy.

Almost every department has a written towing and inventory policy. Officers must:

• Know the policy

• Follow it consistently

• Document the inventory properly

Failure to follow policy is the single most common reason judges suppress these searches.

C. The search must be truly administrative, not investigatory.

The officer’s purpose matters. If the real goal was to look for drugs, guns, or evidence, the search violates Article 14—even if officers claim it was an inventory.

Signs of an investigatory motive include:

• Opening closed containers without policy authorization

• Searching areas irrelevant to property protection

• Selectively searching places where contraband is commonly hidden

• Inconsistent or incomplete inventory logs

3. Why Do Judges Suppress Inventory Searches?

Massachusetts judges are particularly skeptical of inventory searches because they are so easy for police to abuse. Here are the most common reasons suppression occurs:

A. The tow was unnecessary.

If a licensed, sober driver was present—or could have arrived within minutes—there is no lawful basis to impound the vehicle.

Courts repeatedly hold: No valid impoundment, no valid inventory search.

B. Officers deviated from policy.

Inventory policies typically specify:

• What areas may be searched

• Whether closed containers may be opened

• What must be documented

• How the inventory must be recorded

If officers skip steps, improvise, or ignore restrictions, the search is invalid.

C. The search was obviously a pretext for investigation.

Judges look closely for signs of investigative intent, including:

• Searching only the center console, glove box, and trunk—classic hiding spots

• Failing to document valuables but meticulously listing contraband

• Telling the defendant, “We’re going to search this car” before deciding to tow

If the inventory search resembles a criminal investigation, courts see through it.

D. Opening containers without authority.

Unless the written policy authorizes opening:

• backbacks

• purses

• duffel bags

• lockboxes

• sealed containers

…an officer cannot simply explore them “to protect property.”

Any evidence found inside is subject to suppression.

E. Incomplete or missing inventory reports.

If an officer claims the purpose of the search was to protect property—but writes nothing down—the explanation falls apart.

Courts routinely suppress when:

• Logs are sloppy

• Items are missing

• The report is filled out after contraband is found

F. The inventory occurred at the roadside instead of at the tow lot.

Many policies limit the scope of roadside inventories or prefer completion at a secure location.

When officers search aggressively on the shoulder of the highway, courts often infer an investigative motive.

4. How Inventory Searches Affect Criminal Cases

Inventory searches play a central role in cases involving:

• Firearms

• Drugs

• Stolen property

• OUI arrests

• Motor vehicle offenses

Because these cases often begin with a routine car stop, police sometimes rely on an inventory search as a shortcut around probable cause. When the search is unlawful:

• The gun or drugs are suppressed

• The prosecution loses its key evidence

• The case may be dismissed outright

Some of the most important suppression decisions in Massachusetts stem from exactly this scenario.

5. How a Criminal Defense Attorney Challenges Inventory Searches

At Benzaken, Sheehan & Wood, LLP, we analyze inventory searches using a detailed, methodical approach:

A. Examine the tow decision.

Was the car truly unsafe or unattended? Was another driver available? Was the defendant allowed to arrange for a private tow?

B. Demand the full written policy.

We compare the officer’s actions—step by step—to what the policy actually requires.

C. Review the timeline.

Did the officer announce the search before deciding to tow? Was the inventory completed after contraband was found?

D. Compare the inventory log to bodycam footage.

If the log omits important items, or the officer never actually “inventoried” anything, the search is vulnerable.

E. Challenge container searches.

If the policy doesn’t authorize opening a bag or container, suppression is often straightforward.

Conclusion

Inventory searches occupy a strange space in search-and-seizure law—officially administrative, but capable of functioning as investigative tools. That tension is why Massachusetts judges scrutinize these searches so carefully and why suppression is so common.

If your case involves an inventory search, do not assume the evidence is admissible. A skilled defense attorney can often show that the tow was unnecessary, the policy was ignored, or the search was a pretext for investigation.

At Benzaken, Sheehan & Wood, LLP, we challenge these searches regularly and know how to dismantle them. If you’re facing charges after police searched your vehicle, call us at (508) 897-0001 for a confidential case evaluation.

Your rights deserve protection—especially when the government cuts corners.