This court case is active
The trial court was correct in holding that Article I, Section 7 requires a consideration of reasonable alternatives before a vehicle is impounded, and a law contravening that protection is unconstitutional.
Impoundment of a person’s vehicle is a significant intrusion on “private affairs,” particularly because it is accompanied by an intrusive inventory search, and mandating it in every case regardless of necessity should be ruled violative of the state constitution.
Impoundment of a person’s vehicle is a significant intrusion on “private affairs,” particularly because it is accompanied by an intrusive inventory search, and mandating it in every case regardless of necessity should be ruled violative of the state constitution.
