Michael James Eakman v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Co Crim Ct at Law No 8 of Harris County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

NO. 10-92-082-CR

MICHAEL JAMES EAKMAN,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Criminal Court at Law No. 8

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court # 9202588

O P I N I O N

This is an appeal by Appellant Eakman from his conviction for unlawfully carrying a weapon, for which he was assessed four days in the Harris County jail and a $250 fine.

Appellant was charged by information with unlawfully carrying a weapon. He pled guilty, waived his right to a jury and was found guilty by the court and assessed four days in the Harris County jail and a fine of $250.

Prior to trial, Appellant filed a motion to suppress evidence which, after a hearing, was overruled by the trial court.

Appellant appeals on one point: The trial court committed reversible error in denying Appellant's motion to suppress.

On January 18, 1992, Officer Blalock had occasion to speak to Appellant in the parking lot of Graham's Auto Repair Service. Two additional officers were dispatched to the location to assist Officer Blalock.

Appellant was found standing next to his red Porsche automobile which had sustained damage to its right front fender. Appellant was intoxicated and had vomited on himself. He was so intoxicated that the officers formed the opinion he would present a danger to himself and others if he were allowed to leave. The police arrested him for public intoxication and conducted an inventory search of the vehicle pursuant to police department policy in preparation for the towing and impoundment of the vehicle.

During the inventory search of the vehicle, the police discovered a loaded semi-automatic pistol which was the subject of the information subsequently brought against Appellant. After the weapon was found, but before the vehicle was towed, Appellant informed the police that he knew the owner of the garage, that it was his intention to leave the vehicle for repairs and desired to lock the vehicle and leave it in the parking lot. In accordance with Appellant's desires, police did not tow the vehicle.

Appellant contends that the inventory was improper and that the trial court should have suppressed the handgun. Inventory searches are legal and reasonable and need not be predicated upon the same requirements for probable cause or in obtaining a search warrant. Backer v. State, (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) 656 S.W.2d 463, 464. Inventory searches conducted pursuant to standard police procedures are reasonable. The purpose of an inventory search is to protect the owner's property while it remains in police custody, to protect the police against claims or disputes over lost or stolen property, and to protect the police from potential damages. Kelley v. State, (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) 677 S.W.2d 34, 37.

At the time the police conducted the inventory of Appellant's vehicle, they were certainly authorized to do so. It was only after the inventory had been completed that Appellant informed the police that he wanted the car to remain on the garage parking lot. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to establish that the officers followed established departmental policy; that the inventory search was proper, and that the evidence found in that search was admissible. Murdock v. State, (Tex. App. Texarkana) 840 S.W.2d 558, 569.

Appellant's point is overruled. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

FRANK G. McDONALD

Chief Justice (Retired)

Before Justice Cummings,

Justice Vance, and

Chief Justice (Retired) McDonald

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed January 27, 1993

Do not publish