Opinion ID: 682140
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Reasonableness of Officer McCombs' Conduct.

Text: 25 On appeal, Officer McCombs asserts a reasonable officer could believe the impoundment of Gahn's vehicle was lawful under the caretaking exception. Officer McCombs contends the lawful arrest of Larry Gahn, coupled with the inability to secure the vehicle against vandalism, made the impoundment reasonable. 1 We agree. 26 The Supreme Court has determined that the impoundment of a vehicle to protect it from theft, vandalism, or negligence is a proper exercise of the community caretaking function. Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 373 (1987). Here, the impoundment was incidental to the lawful arrest of the car's driver. Significantly, the car's back window was broken out, making it impossible to secure the car against vandalism or theft. Moreover, the car was parked in a private lot reserved for customers only, and although Gahn may initially have been a customer, he ceased to be one at his arrest. Gahn refused to identify himself or cooperate with the officer. Not knowing when Gahn would return or if Gahn was the car's legal owner, an officer could reasonably conclude that impoundment was an appropriate exercise of the caretaking function. See Hallstrom v. City of Garden City, 991 F.2d 1473, 1477 n. 4 (9th Cir.) (officer's impoundment of arrestee's car from a private parking lot was reasonable under the community caretaking function), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 549 (1993). 27 Gahn contends the impoundment was unreasonable because Officer McCombs refused to let Gahn make alternative arrangements for the car. However, in discharging the caretaking function, a police officer need not use the least intrusive means. Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. at 373-74. The district court order denying Officer McCombs' motion for summary judgment is reversed. 28 AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.