Marling v. Littlejohn

Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant’s habeas petition, challenging his drug-related conviction on ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present best argument to support his motion to suppress drugs seized by police from locked box in his car during inventory search of his car when officers used screwdriver to pry open box. While Dist. Ct. found that defendant’s constitutional rights had been violated because police had violated their own policy that prohibited unreasonable damage to property during inventory search, and because trial counsel had failed to raise argument at time motion to suppress was filed, any departure by police from local policy lacked constitutional significance. Moreover, instant local policy, which provided that officers should avoid opening containers where it would cause unreasonable potential damage to property, was valid policy, such that Dist. Ct.'s disagreement with discretion used by police officers did not make search of box unconstitutional. Ct. also observed that defendants did not violate local policy, where box was generally intact after search occurred, such that if any “unreasonable” damage to box occurred, such damage could be focus of tort claim only.