State v. Kroetz, 1 CA-CR 15-0528

On Nov. 15, 2013, Mesa police stopped Michael Lee Kroetz for expired registration and discovered his license was suspended; officers decided to impound/tow the vehicle.
Officer Jensen conducted an MPD inventory search before towing, found a handgun under the driver’s seat and an unlabeled prescription bottle containing ~50 pills in plain view on the passenger floorboard.
Officer Jensen seized the gun and pills as evidence; forensic testing later showed the pills contained hydrocodone. Kroetz was a stipulated prohibited possessor.
Kroetz was indicted on possession/use of narcotics and misconduct involving weapons (both class 4 felonies); he moved pretrial to suppress the items seized during the inventory search.
At the suppression hearing the court found Officer Jensen credible, characterized the incomplete impound form as sloppy but not in bad faith, alternatively finding the items would have been inevitably discovered, and denied suppression.
A jury convicted Kroetz on both counts; the court sentenced him to prison on the weapons count and probation on the narcotics count. Kroetz appealed the denial of suppression; the court affirmed.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Validity of inventory search under Fourth Amendment	Kroetz: search was pretextual and unlawful because officer failed to itemize seized property on the MPD "30 Day Impound Tow" form	State: search complied with MPD standard procedures and was therefore presumptively in good faith	Court: affirmed—inventory search lawful; omission was sloppy, not bad faith; good-faith requirement met
Whether officer’s failure to document seizure defeats caretaking exception	Kroetz: incomplete documentation shows lack of routine, reasonable inventory	State: documentary omission does not prove intentional subterfuge; officer completed a police report noting items	Court: officer’s testimony was credible; omission was oversight and did not show investigatory motive; inventory was reasonable
Applicability of inevitable discovery (alternative ground)	Kroetz: argues inevitable discovery inapplicable if inventory unlawful	State: trial court alternatively found inevitable discovery applicable	Court: did not need to resolve because inventory search was lawful; affirmed without deciding this argument
Standard of review for suppression ruling	Kroetz: contends trial court erred as matter of law	State: factual credibility and discretionary findings should be deferred to trial court	Court: reviewed de novo legal issues but deferred to trial court on credibility/facts; no abuse of discretion found

State v. Organ, 225 Ariz. 43 (App. 2010) (inventory searches are community caretaking exception and require custody plus good faith)
State v. Dean, 206 Ariz. 158 (2003) (inventory must be routine and not a pretext for investigation)
South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976) (inventory searches permissible to protect property and officer safety)
Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367 (inventory searches conducted pursuant to standard procedures are presumptively reasonable)
State v. Moody, 208 Ariz. 424 (2004) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
Wilson v. State, 237 Ariz. 296 (2015) (consider only evidence presented at suppression hearing and view facts favoring sustaining ruling)
Mendoza-Ruiz v. State, 225 Ariz. 473 (2010) (deference to trial court credibility determinations)
In re One 1965 Econoline, 109 Ariz. 433 (1973) (good-faith inventory inquiry focuses on reasonableness, not purity of intent)