T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptundert he * doctr i nes of l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a, and col l at er al es t oppel . I tm aybe ci t ed, h o w e v e r, fo r its p e rsu a siv e v a lu e c o n sis ten t w ith F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 2 .1 a n d 1 0 th C i r . R . 32. 1. A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s t hr ee-j udge ** panel has det erm i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notbe of mat er i al a ss ista n c e in th e d e ter m in a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a u se is th e re fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### Ju n e5,2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA , Pl ai nt i ff - A ppel l ee, v. B R I T T E D WA R D K I N Z A L O W, D e fe n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 06- 6223 ( D . C. N o. CR - 05 - 12 2- 1- F) (W .D . O k la .)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e KELLY , M UR P HY , and O’ BRI EN , C i rcui tJudg es. ** D efen d an t- A p p ell an t B ri ttE d w ard K inza low ap p ea ls th e d istri ct co u rt ’s deni al of hi s m ot i on t o s uppr es s evi dence obt ai ned dur i ng an i nvent or ys ear ch of hi s vehi cl e byO kl ahoma C i t ypol i ce on J une 1, 2005. See U ni t ed St at es v. K i nzal ow , 2005 W L 2978331, at*2 ( W . D . O kl a. N ov. 7, 2005) . M r . K i nzal ow ent er ed a c ondi t i onal gui l t ypl ea t o one- countof bei ng a fe l on i n pos s es s i on of a- 2 -

fi r earm , 18 U . S. C . § 922( g) ( 1) , and w as s ent ence d t o 188 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm ent fo llo w e d b yfiv e y e a rs’ su p e rv ise d re lea se . H e n o w a p p e a ls th e d e n ial o f h is m ot i on t o s uppr es s . See Fed. R . C r i m . P. 11( a) ( 2) ( condi t i onal pl ea) . O ur j u r i s d i c t i o n a r i s e s u n d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n d we a ffi r m.

B ackgr ound O n J une 1, 2005, O kl ahoma C i typol i ce offi cer s pr ocee ded t o a dupl ex a p a rt m e n t b u ild in g to e x e c u te a n a rr e s t w a rr a n t fo r M ir o n M o a n in g (“ M ir o n ” ), a know n gang mem berw ant ed i n connec t i on w i th a dr i ve- bys hoot i ng. B as ed on i nform at i on pr ovi ded byan i nform ant , pol i ce be l i eved thatM i r on w as l ocat ed at A par t m entB of the dupl ex. T he apa r t m enthad bee n r ent ed byL or i el Sot o ( the gi r l fr i end of M i r on’ s br ot her ) . T he pol i ce be l i eved thatM i r on r out i nel ycarr i ed a fi r earm and knew t hatt he dupl ex w as l ocat ed w i thi n an ar ea thathad a hi gh i nci dence of s er i ous cr i m es i ncl udi ng m ur der , r ape, r obbery , and manufactur i ng a n d tr a ffic k in g in d ru g s . W hen pol i ce a r r i ved att he dupl ex, a D odge truck w as parked i n the dr i vew ayand w as t he onl yvehi cl e pr es ent . A s tw o offi cer s appr oache d the dupl ex, t heyobs erved M i r on w al ki ng outof a ba ck bedr oom and i nt o the l i vi ng r oom ar ea. W hen the off i cer s ent er ed, M i r on l eftthe l i vi ng r oom and att empt ed t o r etur n t o t he bedr oom . O ne of the off i cer s , O ffi cerC oni gl i one, fol l ow ed M i r on i nt o t he bedr oom t o effectan arr es t . O ffi cerC oni gl i one then obs erved w hathe- 3 -

b e lie v e d w a s a s m a ll p la s tic b a g c o n ta in in g m a riju a n a o n a ta b le b e s id e th e b e d . T he otheroffi cer , O ffi cerW al s h, ent er ed the dupl ex behi nd O ffi cerC oni gl i one an d im m ed iat elyo b serv ed A n ton io M o an ing (M ir o n ’s bro ther), M s. S o to, and M r. K i nzalow si t t i ng i n the l i ving room . T o secure t he p rem i ses, O ffi cer W al sh o r d e r e d t h e m t o g e to n t h e g r o u n d a n d h a n d c u ffe d th e m. B eca us e the off

i cer s di d notpos s es s a s ear ch w arr antforthe pr emi s es , they r eques t ed and obt ai ned M s . Sot o’ s w r i t t en perm i s s i on t o s ear ch the apa r t m entfor t he w eapo n u sed i n the dri ve-byshoo t i ng . D uri ng theircon versat i on w i th M s. Sot o, s he i nform ed the off i cer s t hats he di d notl i ke M r . K i nzal ow and di d notl i ke hi m hangi ng ar ound herboy fr i end bec aus e M r . K i nzal ow oft en had guns and d ru g s w ith h im . T hereaft er, ano t her officer , O ffi cer W hit e, rem ov ed A ntoni o M oan i ng , M s. Sot o, and M r . K i nzal ow fr om t he apa r t m entw hi l e O ffi cerC oni gl i one s ear ched the pr emi s es . D ur i ng t hats ear ch, O ffi cerC oni gl i one found a handgun i n a cl os et w i t hi n t he s ame bedr oom w her e M i r on had bee n arr es t ed. H e al s o found a s etof key s on a t abl e i n t he l i vi ng r oom w hi ch had a s m al l pi l l cont ai nercont ai ni ng ei ghtdi aze pam (a contr ol l ed s ubs t ance ) pi l l s . W hen the off i ceri nqui r ed t o w hom t he k ey s bel on ged , M r. K i nzalow res po nd ed thattheyw ere hi s. O nce o uts i de, O ffi cer W hit e asked M r. K i nzalow w hetherhe h ad an ygu ns, k n iv e s , d ru g s , o r a n yth in g s h a rp th a t m ig h t p o k e th e o ffic e r d u ri n g th e p a t d o w n . M r . K i nzal ow r es ponded thathe had a kni fe i n hi s l eftpocketand an ounc e of- 4 -

m ar ij uana i n hi s r i ghtpocket . O ffi cerW hi t e r emoved bot h i t ems and c om pl et ed t he pat - dow n s ear ch. H e ther eaf t erarr es t ed M r . K i nzal ow and pl ace d hi m i n the p atrol ca r. A ft erM r . K i nzal ow w as arr es t ed, M s . Sot o i nform ed the off i cer s thats he di d notw anthi s D odge truck t o r emai n atthe dupl ex and thats he had noti nvi t ed M r . K i nzal ow t o herapart m ent . She di d nots peci fi cal l yr eques tthatthe truck be i m pounded orfi l e a tr es pas s compl ai nt . T he off i cer s t es t i fi ed thatthe bed of the tru ck w as f

u ll o f M r. K inza low ’s pe rson al effe cts an d that the o n lyw ayto se cu re t he vehi cl e and the i t ems i tcont ai ned w as t o have i ti m pounded. T hus , pur s uant t o O kl ahoma C i t yPol i ce D epart m entpol i cy§ 183. 20( G ) , the off i cer s i m pounded t he truck fors afe keepi ng. W hi l e the truck w as s t i l l i n the dr i vew ayof the dupl ex, t he off i cer s conduct ed an i nvent or ys ear ch of the truck. T he i nvent or ys ear ch r evea l ed mar ij uana a nd t he fi r earm s gi vi ng r i s e t o the curr entchar ge.

D i s cus s i on T he bur den of e s t abl i s hi ng a Four th A m endmentvi ol at i on l i es w i th the d e fe n d a n t. U n ite d S ta te s v . P a tte rs o n , 4 7 2 F .3 d 7 6 7 , 7 7 5 (1 0 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ).

“ W h e n r e v i e w i n g t h e d e n i a l o f a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s , w e a c c e p tth e d i s tr i c tc o u r t 's fac tual fi ndi ngs unl es s cl ear l yerr oneous , and w e r evi ew the evi dence i n the l i ght m o st fa v o ra b le to th e g o v e rn m e n t. H o w e v e r, w e re v iew d e n o v o th e u lti m a te determ i nati on of reasonab l eness un der the F ou rth A m end m ent because t hat i s a- 5 -

lega l con clus ion . ” U n it ed S tat es v . C h av ir a, 46 7 F . 3 d 1 2 8 6 , 1 2 9 0 (10 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) (cit ati o n o m itted). M r. K in z a lo w first a rg u e s th a t h is in iti a l d e ten tio n w a s a v io latio n o f h is Four t h A m endmentr i ghtt o be fr ee f r om unr eas onabl e s ear ches and s ei zur es , and t hus t he frui t s of the i nvent or ys ear ch of hi s truck, w hi ch w oul d nothave oc curr ed bu tfo rt he un l a w fu l de t e nt i on , s ho ul d b e s up pr e s s e d. I n Te rryv. O hi o, 39 2 U. S. 1 ( 1968) , t he Supr eme C our thel d thatl aw enfor cementoffi ci al s m ays t op an i ndi vi dual i n t he abs ence of pr obabl e ca us e s o l ong as the off i ci al i s “abl e t o poi nt t o s peci fi c and a r t i cul abl e fa ct s ” w hi ch l ead the off i ci al t o bel i eve the i ndi vi dual m igh t be in v o lved in a c ri m inal d ee d . Id. at 21 -22 . T h ere af ter, the C o u rt e x t e n d e d t h e Te r r yru l e t o a l l o w “ p r o t e c t i v e s we e p s ”

— a s e a r c h o f a h o me c o n d u c ted in c id e n t to a rre st a n d so lelyto e n su re o ffice r p ro tec tio n — b a se d o n ly on r eas onabl e s us pi ci on “thatt he ar ea s w eptharbor ed an i ndi vi dual pos i ng a d a n g e r to th e o ffice r o r o th e rs.” S e e M a ry lan d v . B u ie, 4 9 4 U .S . 3 2 5 , 3 2 7 (1 0 th C i r . 1990) . W e have s i nce he l d thatB ui e al s o appl i es t o “t empora rys ei zur es of per s ons ( i . e. ‘ pr ot ect i ve det ent i ons ’ ) ” bec aus e “the abi l i tyt o s ear ch fordanger ous in d iv id u a ls p ro v id e s littl e p ro tec tio n u n les s it is a c c o m p a n ied b yth e a b ili tyto te m p o ra ri ly se iz e a n yd a n g e ro u s in d iv id u a ls th a t a re lo c a te d d u ri n g th e s e a rc h . . . .” U n ite d S ta te s v . M a d d o x , 3 8 8 F .3 d 1 3 5 6 , 1 3 6 2 (1 0 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). T he r equi r ed l evel of s us pi ci on r equi r ed t o effecta pr ot ect i ve det ent i on v aries, ho w ev er, de p en d ing u p o n the a rea in w h ich th e d eten ti o n o cc u rs. W h ere- 6 -

an i ndi vi dual i s i n an ar ea i m m edi at el yadj oi ni ng the arr es t ee, the i ndi vi dual m ay be p l aced in t em po raryprot ect i ve d et enti on even i n the absence o f prob able cause ora r eas onabl e s us pi ci on t hatt he i ndi vi dual pos es a thr eatt o offi cers afe ty . See id . at 1 3 6 2 -6 3 (c iti n g T h o m p so n v . C ityo f L a w re n c e , 5 8 F .3 d 1 5 1 1 , 1 5 1 7 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 9 5 )). O n th e o th e r h a n d , w h e re a n in d iv id u a l is o n th e a rre st s c e n e b u t is noti n an ar ea i m m edi at el yadj oi ni ng the arr es t ee, the i ndi vi dual m ayonl ybe detai ned w here officer s possess a reas on able s uspici on that the indi vidual po ses a danger . See i d. at1363. In the inst ant cas e, t he ev i den ce i n the r ecord, view ed in the li gh tm ost favor abl e t o t he governm ent , l eads us t o concl ude thatM r . K i nzal ow w as s eat ed i n an area i m m ediat el yadjoi ning M i ron M oan i ng w hen he w as arres t ed. T hu s, p u rsu a n t to B u ie a n d M a d d o x , M r. K in z a lo w c o u ld b e d e tain e d fo r o ffice r sa fe ty purpos es r egar dl es s of w hethert he off i cer s pos s es s ed a r eas onabl e s us pi ci on that h e p o sed a d an g er. O fficer W alsh test ifi ed that w h en h e e n tered M s. S o to’s a p a rtm e n t, M r. K in z a lo w w a s s e a ted in a n a rm c h a ir to th e so u th o f a c o ffe e tab le w h ich w a s n e x t to th e d o o rw a yo f th e b e d ro o m w h e re M iro n w a s e v e n tu a lly arr es t ed. A pl t . A pp. at64. W hi l e no s cal ed di agr am i s i n the r ecor d, the di s t ance betw een the bedr oom and the l i vi ng r oom w as notgr eat–i n the t i m e i tt ook fort he offi cer s t o qui ckl yent ert he apa r t m entand make the arr es t , M i r on l eftthe b e d ro o m , e n te re d th e liv in g ro o m , tu rn e d a ro u n d , a n d a g a in e n te re d th e b e d ro o m . S ee A p lt . A p p . at 47 . G iven the c lose p rox im ityo f th e li v ing roo m w h ere M r.- 7 -

K i nzalow w as seat ed to the b edroom w here M i ron w as arres t ed, the o ffi cers ’ i ni t i al det ent i on of M r . K i nzal ow w as r eas onabl e. C f. T hom ps on, 58 F. 3d at1517 ( deemi ng a t empora r ydet ent i on foroffi cers afe typurpos es r eas onabl e i n the a b s e n c e o f

r e a s o n a b l e s u s p i c i o n b a s e d o n th e d e t a i n e e ’ s p r e s e n c e i n th e s a me bus i nes s es t abl i s hm entas t he arr es t ee) ; compar e w i th M addox, 388 F. 3d at1362- 63 ( hol di ng t hatr eas onabl e s us pi ci on w as r equi r ed t o det ai n an i ndi vi dual for o fficer safetyrea so n s in a ca rpo rto u tsi d e the d w ell ing w h ere the a rrest oc cu rred ). A par tfr om hi s i ni t i al det ent i on, M r . K i nzal ow al s o chal l enges O ffi cer W hi t e’ s i nqui r yas t o t he pr es ence of w eapons and drugs on hi s per s on and the pat - dow n s ear ch thatfol l ow ed. O nce a det ent i on i s deemed t o have be en l egal at i t s i ncept i on, w e l ook onl yt o “w hetheri tw as r eas onabl yr el at ed i n s cope t o the ci r cumst ance s w hi ch j us t i fi ed the i nt er fer ence i n the fi r s tpl ace . ” M addox, 388 F. 3d at1368 ( ci t i ng T err y , 392 U . S. at20) . “I n thatr egar d, thi s ci r cui thas concl uded thatan off

i cerm ayconducta pat - dow n s ear ch ( or‘ fr i s k’ ) i f he ors he harbor s an art i cul abl e and r eas onabl e s us pi ci on thatthe per s on i s arm ed and danger ous . ” U ni t ed St at es v. H i s haw , 235 F. 3d 565, 570 ( 10th C i r . 2000) (i n te rn a l q u o ta tio n s o m itte d ). H er e, M s . Sot o’ s comm ent s t o the off i cer s t o the effec tthatM r . K i nzal ow o f ten h a d g u n s a n d d ru g s w ith h im is s u fficie n t, stan d in g a lo n e , to ju stif yth e p a tdow n s ear ch, butaddi ng t o O ffi cerW hi t e’ s r eas onabl e s us pi ci on w as the fa ctt hat nar cot i cs had bee n di s cover ed i n the apa r t m ent , s ee U ni t ed St at es v. G ar ci a, 459- 8 -

F .3 d 1 0 5 9 , 1 0 6 5 -6 6 (1 0 th C ir. 2 0 0 6 ) (b a sin g a fin d in g o f re a so n a b le s u sp icio n , in par t , on t he fa ctt hatan off i cer“obs erved a ba ggi e of w hatappea r ed t o be m ethamphet ami ne l y i ng neart he doorof the apa rt m ent ”) , a know n gang mem ber w as pr es enti n t he apa r t m ent , s ee i d. at1066- 67, and the nei ghbor hood i n w hi ch t he dupl ex w as l ocat ed w as a part i cul ar l ydanger ous one, s ee U ni t ed St at es v. A t l as , 94 F. 3d 447, 450- 51 ( 8t h C i r . 1996) ( offi cer s had r eas onabl e s us pi ci on t hat a s us pectw as arm ed and da nger ous i n par tbeca us e “the off i cer s w er e r es pondi ng to a c a ll i n a d a n g e ro u s n e ig h b o rh o o d ” ). A sk in g w h e th e r M r. K in z a lo w w a s in po sses si on of an yw eapo ns or drugs before con du ct i ng the p at -dow n w as al so per fec t l yr eas onabl e. See M addox, 388 F. 3d at1368; s ee a l s o M uehl erv. M ena, 5 4 4 U .S . 9 3 , 1 0 1 (2 0 0 5 ) (q u e stio n in g w h ich d o e s n o t p ro lo n g a d e ten tio n is n o t a “s ei zur e” w i t hi n t he meani ng of the Four th A m endmentand does notr equi r e any a d d itio n a l s u s p ic io n ). T he ca s es on w hi ch M r . K i nzal ow pr i m ar i l yr el i es ar e unava i l i ng. N ei ther Y b arra v . Il li n o is, 4 4 4 U . S . 8 5 (19 7 9 ), n o r L ev eto v . L ap ina, 25 8 F . 3 d 1 5 6 (3rd C i r . 2001) , s t and foranyt hi ng m or e than the pr opos i t i on thata pat - dow n s ear ch forw eapons m us tbe bas ed on a r eas onabl e s us pi ci on thatthe i ndi vi dual m aybe arm ed and da nger ous and thatm er e pr es ence atthe s cene , s t andi ng al one, m aynot gi ve r i s e t o s uch s us pi ci on. A s pr evi ous l ys t at ed, how ever , i n thi s cas e, O ffi cer W hi t e ac t ed undera r eas onabl e s us pi ci on thatM r . K i nzal ow w as arm ed and dan gerous an d thatsuspi ci on w as based o n m ore than m ere pr op i nq uity . T hu s,- 9 -

Y b arra a n d L ev eto a re ina p p o sit e. L ast, S ibro n v . N ew Y o rk, 39 2 U . S . 4 0 (19 6 8 ), p r i ma r i l yc o n c e r n s p r o b a b l e c a u s e t o a rr e s ta n d th e a b i l i tyo f o ffi c e r s t o p e r fo r m a s ear ch i nci dentt her et o. W hi l e the C our ti n thatcas e hel d thatm er el yt al ki ng t o a k n o w n d rug d ea ler do es n o t give ri se to p rob ab le ca u se (o r reaso n ab le su sp ici o n ), se e id . at 6 2 -6 4 , the o ffice rs h e re p o ss e ss e d m o re in fo rm a tio n th a n w a s p re se n t in S ibro n an d ce rt ainlyh ad an o bjecti v elyrea so n ab le ap p reh en sion o f d an g er. I n su m , n e ith e r M r. K in z a lo w ’s in iti a l d e ten tio n n o r O ffice r W h ite’s su b se q u e n t p a td o w n o r q u e s tio n in g w e re in v io la tio n o f th e F o u rt h A m e n d m e n t. M r. K in z a lo w ’s fin a l ar g u m e n t is th a t p o lice v io late d th e F o u rth A m en d m en t w h en theyim p o u n d ed h is D o d g e truc k an d p erfo rm ed an inv en tory s ear ch of i t , and thus t he fi r earm s found i ns i de s houl d be s uppr es s ed as frui tof t he poi s onous t r ee. I n or dert o comportw i th the Four th A m endment , the i m poundm entof M r . K i nzal ow ’ s truck mustei therhave be en s anct i oned under O kl ahoma l aw orfel l w i t hi n t he publ i c s afe tyexce pt i on of Sout h D akot a v. O pperm an, 428 U . S. 364, 369 ( 1976) . See U ni t ed St at es v. R i os , 88 F. 3d 867, 8 7 0 (1 0 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ). U nderO kl ahoma l aw , “a c aron pr i vat e pr opertycannotbe i m pounded abs enta r eques tfr om t he pr opertyow nerorothers peci fi c author i zat i on. ” M c G a u g h e yv . S tate , 3 7 P .3 d 1 3 0 , 1 4 3 (O k la. C rim . A p p . 2 0 0 1 ). W h ile M s. S o to d id n o t sp e c ifica llyre q u e st th a t M r. K in z a lo w ’s v e h icle b e im p o u n d e d , sh e d id i nform t he off

i cer s t hats he di d notw anti ts i t t i ng i n fr ontof herapart m ent . See- 10 -

A p lt. A p p . at 6 6 . M o re o v e r, O k lah o m a C ityp o licy§ 1 8 3 .2 0 (G ) sp e c ifica lly author i zes pol i ce t o i m pound vehi cl es “[w ] hen the dr i verof a ve hi cl e i s arr es t ed a n d t h e o ffi c e rd e t e r m i n e s i m p o u n d m e n ti s n e e d e d . ” S e e a l s o S t a t e v . S h o rn e y, 5 2 4 P .2 d 6 9 , 7 1 (O k la . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 7 4 ) ( “ [ M ]u n ic ip a litie s h a v e th e a u th o ri ty . . . t o author i ze thei rr es pect i ve pol i ce de part m ent s t o i m pound vehi cl es . . . w hen the dr i verof a ve hi cl e i s pl ace d underarr es tand t aken i nt o cus t ody . ”) . T hatpol i cy m akes no di s t i nct i on betw een ve hi cl es found on pr i vat e and publ i c pr operty , and t he off i cer s i n t hi s cas e had a val i d r eas on fori m poundi ng the vehi cl e— i tw as p a rk e d in a h ig h c rim e a re a a n d M r. K in z a lo w ’s p e rso n a l effe c ts w e re re a d ily a c c e ss ib le a n d v u ln e ra b le to th e f t. T h u s, so lo n g a s M r. K in z a lo w w a s v a lid ly arr es t ed— and w e have hel d t hathe w as — hi s truck coul d be i m pounded under O kl ahoma l aw . See Tom l i n v. St at e, 869 P. 2d 334, 343 ( O kl a. C r i m . A pp. 1994) ( “The val i di t yof an i m poundm entpur s uantt o an arr es tnece s s ar i l yr es t s on the val i di t yof the arr es t. . . . ”) . B eca us e the i m poundm entof M r . K i nzal ow ’ s truck c o m p o rte d w ith O k lah o m a law , itw a s a lso re a so n a b le fo r p u rp o se s o f th e F o u rth A m e n d m e n t. W hen a ve hi cl e i s l egal l yi m pounded, pol i ce may , fol l ow i ng s t andar di zed pr ocedur es and i n t he abs ence of bad fai th, per form an i nvent or ys ear ch of the c o n te n ts o f

th e v e h ic le . S e e C o lo ra d o v . B e rt in e , 4 7 9 U .S . 3 6 7 , 3 7 2 (1 9 8 7 ).O kl ahoma C i t ypol i cy§ 183. 30 pr ovi des t hat , “A l l vehi cl es i m pounded 1 w i l l be s ubj ect ed t o a r out i ne cus t odi al i nvent ory . T he i nvent or yw i l l be c o n d u c ted a t th e sc e n e o f th e im p o u n d m e n t (w h e n e v e r th is c a n b e re a so n a b ly a c c o m p lis h e d ) i n th e p re s e n c e o f th e w re c k e r d ri v e r.” - 11 - H er e, t he offi cer s fol l ow ed O kl ahoma C i ty pol i cy § 183. 30 i n per form i ng an 1 in v e n to ryse a rc h o f

th e tru c k , an d M r. K in z a lo w h a s n o t m a d e th e re q u isite sh o w ing o f b ad fa ith . A d d it ion all y , the p o li ce interests pre sen t i n this case are i dent i cal t o t hos e j us t i fy i ng t he i nvent or ys ear ch i n B er t i ne. See i d. at373 (e x p lain in g th a t th e w a rra n tles s in v e n to ryse a rc h w a s ju stified b yp o lice in ter e sts i n s afe guar di ng t he i m pounded pr operty , pr event i ng cl ai m s of theft , vandal i s m , or negl i gence , and ave r t i ng anydangert he pr opertym i ghtpos e t o the pol i ce a nd ot her s ) . C ons equent l y , t he i nvent orys ear ch w as j us t i fi ed and r eas onabl e. AF F I RMED . E n tered fo r th e C o u rt P au l J. K ell y , Jr. C i r cui tJ udge