Driving on a Suspended or Revoked License (or Never Had a License), per V.C. § 14601.1 (or V.C. § 12500), and the Community Caretaking Doctrine

In the previous California Legal Update (Vol. 24, #11, Oct. 28, 2019), my brief of a Fourth District Court of Appeal (San Diego) decision, People v. Lee (Oct. 3, 2019) 40 Cal.App.5th 853, brought forth a number of (sometimes) irate (“don’t kill the messenger”) responses concerning the impounding of vehicles. As I noted in my brief, Lee specifically held that despite the existence of authorizing statutes (e.g., V.C. § 14602.6(a)(1)), it is a Fourth Amendment violation to impound a vehicle and conduct a subsequent warrantless inventory search unless such an impoundment is also allowable under the so-called “Community Caretaking Doctrine.” In Lee, the defendant was caught driving while his license was suspended. Among the arguments the People made in Lee in attempting to justify the warrantless impoundment and inventory search of defendant’s vehicle was that § 14602.6(a)(1) authorizes such a procedure. The Appellate Court ruled to the contrary. Per People v. Lee, to be lawful, the impoundment of a vehicle must be both authorized by statute (such as V.C. § 14602.6(a)(1)) and in compliance with the Community Caretaking Doctrine. (pp. 867-869.) (Lee also stands for the proposition that an inventory search of an impounded motor vehicle, when done for the purpose of finding evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing as opposed to merely protecting the owner’s personal possessions, is illegal. See also United States v. Johnson (9th Cir. 2018) 889 F.3rd 1120, 1125. But that is not the issue here.) Generally, the Community Caretaking Doctrine has been held to apply (allowing for the impoundment of a vehicle) only when the vehicle, if left at the scene, is parked illegally, blocks traffic or passage, or stands at risk of theft or vandalism. A number of you told me that you use V.C. § 14602.6(a)(1) (or other impound statutes; e.g., V.C. § 22651; see below) to justify the impoundment and inventory of vehicles on a regular basis without concern about the applicability of the Community Caretaking theory, and that no one ever complains. Well, that may be. But if so, it’s likely that in those instances Community Caretaking never became an in-court issue because (1) The D.A. rejected the case and never told you, (2) no illegal contraband was found during the inventory search so no criminal case was filed as a result, (3) defense counsel was unaware of these rules and failed to litigate them, and/or (4) ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.