United States v. Coccia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “the existence of and an officer’s adherence to a standardized criteria may be helpful in evaluating the reasonableness of an impoundment
• explaining that “it is inappropriate for the existence of (and 20 adherence to) standard procedures to be the sine qua non of a reasonable impound decision”
• reading Bertine “to indicate that an impoundment decision made pursuant to standardized procedures will most likely, although not necessarily always, satisfy the Fourth Amendment”
• explaining, in vehicle impoundment context, that \it is inappropriate for the existence of (and adherence to) standard procedures to be the sine qua non - 21 - of\ reasonable community caretaking functions
• \[T]here were legitimate community caretaking justifications for impounding [the defendant]'s car and there was no evidence that these justifications were merely pretext for an investigatory search.\
• “Caselaw supports the view that where a driver is arrested and there is no one immediately on hand to take possession, the officials have a legitimate non-investigatory reason f[or] impounding the car.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).