Court Opinion

ID: 9704675
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 00:42:47.745655+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:04.369823
License: Public Domain

Williams, C.J.
(concurring with Justice Boyle). While I am in accord with section i of Justice Boyle’s opinion and I agree with her statement that the true issue is the constitutionality of the initial impoundment, I am unable to agree with her resolution of that issue. Because defendant was not arrested while in her car, her car was lawfully parked and locked at the time of her arrest and there was no evidence that her vehicle was in any way "impeding traffic or threatening public safety and convenience . . . ,” South Dakota v Opperman, 428 US 364, 369; 96 S Ct 3092; *69849 L Ed 2d 1000 (1976), I am not persuaded that the police officers acted reasonably when they impounded the car.
However, because defendant’s purse was in plain view on the front seat of her car, I agree with Justice Boyle that the police could not have reasonably left it there. (Ante, p 688, n 3.) Since returning the purse to defendant would have inevitably led to the discovery1 of the cocaine in her purse, I agree that the decision of the Court of Appeals should be reversed.

 People v Kusowski, 403 Mich 653, 662; 272 NW2d 503 (1978) (Williams, J., concurring); Nix v Williams, 467 US 431; 104 S Ct 2501; 81 L Ed 2d 377 (1984).

 MCL 333.7401(1), (2)(a)(iv); MSA 14.15(7401)(1), (2)(a)(iv).