United States v. Jimmy Torres
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12941
| 9th Cir. | 2016Background
- Torres was arrested for DUI in a Saturn Vue; passenger Young lacked a valid license and ownership of the car was unclear, so LVMPD impounded the vehicle.
- Officer Donaldson conducted a standardized LVMPD inventory of the impounded vehicle and opened the engine air-filter compartment, where he found a Sig Sauer P229 and a holster.
- The firearm proved to be stolen; Torres (a felon) was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He moved to suppress the gun as the product of an unconstitutional search.
- A magistrate judge recommended denying suppression; the district court adopted that recommendation and denied the motion. Torres pleaded guilty conditionally, reserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling.
- At sentencing the court applied a Guidelines enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2) based on two prior felony flight convictions characterized as crimes of violence, producing a 92-month sentence. Torres appealed suppression and his sentence in light of Johnson.
Issues
| Issue | Torres' Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of impoundment | Impoundment exceeded policy/was unreasonable | Impoundment conformed to LVMPD policy and served caretaking purposes (traffic/public safety, uncertain ownership, no licensed driver) | Impoundment was lawful under community-caretaking doctrine and LVMPD policy |
| Scope of inventory search (engine air-filter box) | Opening air-filter compartment exceeded permissible inventory scope and was a pretext to search for evidence | LVMPD policy requires inventory of all containers/compartments; officers reasonably include air-filter box to protect property and public safety | Opening air-filter box was permitted by standardized LVMPD inventory policy and reasonable under Fourth Amendment |
| Due process re: district court adoption of magistrate report | District court allegedly made inconsistent factual findings in de novo review, violating due process | District court adopted magistrate judge’s findings in full; any phrasing differences are consistent | No due process violation; adoption of magistrate’s findings was proper |
| Sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2) (residual clause) | §2K2.1(a)(2)’s residual clause is unconstitutionally vague post-Johnson; enhancement invalid | Government conceded Johnson applies to the Guidelines residual clause | Government conceded the clause is unconstitutional; sentence vacated and case remanded for re-sentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. City of Cornelius, 429 F.3d 858 (9th Cir.) (community-caretaking impoundment principles)
- United States v. Cervantes, 703 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir.) (inventory-search review and standards)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (warrant requirement and Fourth Amendment principles)
- Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367 (inventory searches of containers; caretaking rationale)
- Florida v. Wells, 495 U.S. 1 (limits on inventory searches to prevent pretextual rummaging)
- South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (glove compartment inventory upheld)
- Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (inventory searches to locate firearms to protect public safety)
- Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (unconstitutional vagueness of ACCA residual clause)
- Sykes v. United States, 564 U.S. 1 (prior precedent treating flight-from-LE as violent felony, later affected by Johnson)