Title: Commonwealth v. Lagenella Jr., F., Aplt (concurring)
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 14 MAP 2012
State: Pennsylvania
Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Date: December 27, 2013

[J-120-2012][M.O. – Todd, J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee v. FRANCIS PATRICK LAGENELLA, JR., Appellant : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 14 MAP 2012 Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court at No. 255 MDA 2010 dated 4/5/11 affirming the judgment of sentence of the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, at No. CP-22-CR-540-2009 dated 1-11-10 ARGUED: October 16, 2012 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: December 27, 2013 I agree with the majority’s conclusion that an inventory search was not warranted on the particular facts of this case, as well as with its rejection of the bright-line rule, proposed by the Commonwealth, that all vehicle immobilizations justify constitutionally valid inventory searches. To the extent the majority opinion reflects a bright-line rule to the converse (i.e., that no inventory searches conducted in connection with immobilizations may be valid), however, I remain circumspect and reserve my own judgment.