community caretaker doctrine in Virginia

2013The most relevant exception is the community caretaker doctrine. 1 Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va. App. 285, 289 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529 (1995).

2013The most relevant exception is the community caretaker doctrine. 1 Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va. App. 285, 289 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529 (1995).

2025We have also recognized the community caretaker doctrine, which allows officers to conduct limited searches or seizures without violating the Fourth Amendment, recognizing that “police owe ‘duties to the public, such as rendering aid to individuals in danger of physical harm, reducing the commission of crimes through patrol and other preventive measures, and providing services on an emergency basis.’” Kyer v. Commonwealth, 45 Va. App. 473, 480 (2005) (en banc) (quoting Reynolds v. Commonwealth, 9 Va. App. 430, 436 (1990)).

2014The trial court also found that there were no facts to support reasonable articulable suspicion that Vick was planning to evade the Metro fare.4 Regarding whether the encounter between the police officers and Vick was consensual – and whether Vick voluntarily consented to the search of his backpack, the trial court ruled as follows: The testimony was that the defendant was then removed from the train, not physically, but was removed from the train; and the train 3 The Commonwealth has never argued (at trial or on appeal) that the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement would j

2024For instance, the community-caretaker exception will not immunize an inventory search that is not “conducted pursuant to standard police procedures” or that is “a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 71 Va. App. 771 , 784 (2020) (quoting Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 53, 59 (2015)); Williams v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 723, 731 (2004) (same); King v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 306, 310 (2002) (same); see also Wood, 27 Va. App. at 27 (“Because the evidence indicates that the search was ‘a pretext concealing an investigatory police motive,’

2023The policy considerations that undergird this inventory search exception (also known as the community caretaker exception), are “1) the protection of the owner’s property while it remains in police custody, 2) the protection of police against claims or disputes concerning lost or stolen property, and 3) protection of the public -7- and the police from physical danger.” Williams, 42 Va. App. at 730 .

2025We have also recognized the community caretaker doctrine, which allows officers to conduct limited searches or seizures without violating the Fourth Amendment, recognizing that “police owe ‘duties to the public, such as rendering aid to individuals in danger of physical harm, reducing the commission of crimes through patrol and other preventive measures, and providing services on an emergency basis.’” Kyer v. Commonwealth, 45 Va. App. 473, 480 (2005) (en banc) (quoting Reynolds v. Commonwealth, 9 Va. App. 430, 436 (1990)).

2014The trial court also found that there were no facts to support reasonable articulable suspicion that Vick was planning to evade the Metro fare.4 Regarding whether the encounter between the police officers and Vick was consensual – and whether Vick voluntarily consented to the search of his backpack, the trial court ruled as follows: The testimony was that the defendant was then removed from the train, not physically, but was removed from the train; and the train 3 The Commonwealth has never argued (at trial or on appeal) that the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement would j

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2025Id. 5 Under the community caretaker exception, an officer may search a closed container without a warrant if he or she has “an objectively reasonable belief” that the search “is necessary to provide aid or to protect members of the public from physical harm.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 61 Va. App. 297, 306 (2012). “[T]he warrantless entry must be ‘totally divorced’ from a criminal investigation” for the exception to apply.

2024We have also said about the community- caretaker exception that “the warrantless entry must be ‘totally divorced’ from a criminal investigation.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 61 Va. App. 297, 306 (2012) (quoting Cady, 413 U.S. at 441 ).

2020However, this Court has recognized, Under the community caretaker exception, the police may conduct a warrantless inventory search of a vehicle only if the following conditions are met: “1) the vehicle must be lawfully impounded; 2) the impoundment and subsequent search must be conducted pursuant to standard police procedures; and 3) the impoundment and subsequent search must not be a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Id. (quoting Williams v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 723, 731 (2004)). “[T]he inventory exception does not apply when the inventory is merely ‘a pretext c

2013In Williams, this Court held that the community caretaker exception is grounded in three policy considerations: “1) the protection of the owner’s property while it remains in police custody, 2) the protection of police against claims or disputes concerning lost or stolen property, and 3) protection of the public and the police from physical danger.” 42 Va. App. at 730 , 594 S.E.2d at 309 (citing Opperman, 428 U.S. at 373-76 ; Cady, 413 U.S. at 442-48 ; Reese v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. 1035, 1039 , 265 S.E.2d 746, 749 (1980)).

2024For instance, the community-caretaker exception will not immunize an inventory search that is not “conducted pursuant to standard police procedures” or that is “a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 71 Va. App. 771 , 784 (2020) (quoting Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 53, 59 (2015)); Williams v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 723, 731 (2004) (same); King v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 306, 310 (2002) (same); see also Wood, 27 Va. App. at 27 (“Because the evidence indicates that the search was ‘a pretext concealing an investigatory police motive,’

2013Relying on South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976), and Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973), the trial court found that the sole justification identified by the Supreme Court in allowing warrantless searches pursuant to the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement is “to protect the community’s safety.” The trial court found that there was no safety concern prompting the police to remove the truck in this case, and, accordingly, granted the motion to suppress.

2024For instance, the community-caretaker exception will not immunize an inventory search that is not “conducted pursuant to standard police procedures” or that is “a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 71 Va. App. 771 , 784 (2020) (quoting Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 53, 59 (2015)); Williams v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 723, 731 (2004) (same); King v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 306, 310 (2002) (same); see also Wood, 27 Va. App. at 27 (“Because the evidence indicates that the search was ‘a pretext concealing an investigatory police motive,’

2013The Court held that the entry into the second floor of Woods’ apartment without a warrant was not justified under the community caretaker exception because “the officers’ intrusion into the room of the second floor of the home was not totally divorced from investigating criminal activity and acquiring evidence and, therefore, could not be considered a caretaking function.” Wood v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 21, 28 , 497 S.E.2d 484 (1998).

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev'd on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh'g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). [7] Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the "emergency aid doctrine," is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine.

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev'd on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh'g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). [7] Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the "emergency aid doctrine," is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine.

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2005Compare Commonwealth v. Waters, 20 Va.App. 285, 288-91 , 456 S.E.2d 527, 529-30 (1995), and Barrett v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 773, 776-79 , 447 S.E.2d 243, 245-46 (1994), rev’d on other grounds, 250 Va. 243 , 462 S.E.2d 109 (1995), with Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 436-37 , 388 S.E.2d at 663-64 , and Shannon v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 31, 34-35 , 441 S.E.2d 225, 226-27 , aff'd on reh’g en banc, 19 Va.App. 145 , 449 S.E.2d 584 (1994). 7 Indeed, the non-exigent form of the emergency exception, also called the “emergency aid doctrine,” is often deemed a subset of the community caretaker doctrine. 8

2025The community caretaker doctrine is based on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973), which held “that police officers who patrol the public highways are often called to discharge noncriminal community caretaking functions, such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents.” Caniglia v. Strom, 593 U.S. 194, 196 (2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). -6- Daniels agrees that Williams’s initial approach was consensual and justified as part of a community caretaker function given Daniels’s unusual posture in his vehicle.

2024The community-caretaker doctrine, on the other hand, traces its origins to Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973).

2024“Objective reasonableness remains the linchpin of determining the validity of action taken under the community caretaker doctrine.” King, 39 Va. App. at 312 (citing Terry v. Commonwealth, 23 Va. App. 87, 90 (1996)).

2024For instance, the community-caretaker exception will not immunize an inventory search that is not “conducted pursuant to standard police procedures” or that is “a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Knight v. Commonwealth, 71 Va. App. 771 , 784 (2020) (quoting Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 53, 59 (2015)); Williams v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 723, 731 (2004) (same); King v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 306, 310 (2002) (same); see also Wood, 27 Va. App. at 27 (“Because the evidence indicates that the search was ‘a pretext concealing an investigatory police motive,’

2025The community caretaker doctrine is based on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973), which held “that police officers who patrol the public highways are often called to discharge noncriminal community caretaking functions, such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents.” Caniglia v. Strom, 593 U.S. 194, 196 (2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). -6- Daniels agrees that Williams’s initial approach was consensual and justified as part of a community caretaker function given Daniels’s unusual posture in his vehicle.

2024See also United States v. Treisman, 71 F.4th 225, 232-34 (4th Cir. 2023) (upholding warrantless search of vehicle under the community-caretaker doctrine, stating that Caniglia “did not disturb the principle that police officers may conduct warrantless searches of vehicles when called on ‘to discharge noncriminal “community caretaking functions,” such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents’” (quoting Caniglia, 593 U.S. at 196 )).

2024“Objective reasonableness remains the linchpin of determining the validity of action taken under the community caretaker doctrine.” King, 39 Va. App. at 312 (citing Terry v. Commonwealth, 23 Va. App. 87, 90 (1996)).

2005See Terry v. Commonwealth, 23 Va.App. 87, 91 , 474 S.E.2d 172, 174 (1996); Waters, 20 Va.App. at 289-90 , 456 S.E.2d at 529-30 . [8] See note 1, supra. [9] We have consistently required that any warrantless search, pursuant to either the community caretaker exception or the emergency exception, must be factually unrelated to an intent to search for evidence of illegal activity.

2021Id. at 811-22; see also McArthur, 72 Va. App. at 359, 362-63 (applying Long without assessing the impact of Gant and holding that the facts did not support the vehicle sweep at issue); Moore, 69 Va. App. at 39-40 (recognizing the ongoing validity of Long after Gant but applying Long merely by analogy in conjunction with the community caretaker doctrine). -7- not arrested.” Long, 463 U.S. at 1050 , quoted with approval in Servis v. Commonwealth, 6 Va. App. 507, 519 (1988).

2004See Reynolds, 9 Va.App. at 438 , 388 S.E.2d at 664 (applying the emergency exception and noting that “[n]o evidence in the record suggested] that the [officers’] entry into appellants’ house ... was a pretext to search for contraband or illegal activity rather than to look for possible victims and to secure the property,” and finding that the officers “act[ed] in good faith under the circumstances and according to their responsibilities as law enforcement officers”); compare Williams, 42 Va.App. at 731 , 594 S.E.2d at 309 (noting that a search, pursuant to impoundment of a vehicle and correspo

2011Barrett v. Commonwealth, 250 Va. 243, 246-48 , 462 S.E.2d 109, 111-12 (1995). 10 Unlike the emergency exception, the community caretaker exception has not been applied in Virginia to permit warrantless entries into a home. 11 We have stated when an exception is claimed under the emergency/community caretaker doctrines, the claim “must be scrutinized to insure that it is not mere pretext for entries and searches that otherwise fall under the requirement for a warrant.” Reynolds, 9 Va. App. at 438 , 388 S.E.2d at 664 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2011Barrett v. Commonwealth, 250 Va. 243, 246-48 , 462 S.E.2d 109, 111-12 (1995). 10 Unlike the emergency exception, the community caretaker exception has not been applied in Virginia to permit warrantless entries into a home. 11 We have stated when an exception is claimed under the emergency/community caretaker doctrines, the claim “must be scrutinized to insure that it is not mere pretext for entries and searches that otherwise fall under the requirement for a warrant.” Reynolds, 9 Va. App. at 438 , 388 S.E.2d at 664 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

2024Nonetheless, police may conduct a warrantless inventory search of a vehicle under the community caretaker exception if the following conditions are met: “1) the vehicle must be lawfully impounded; 2) the impoundment and subsequent search must be conducted pursuant to standard police procedures; and 3) the impoundment and subsequent search must not be a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Id. at 784 (quoting Cantrell, 65 Va. App. at 59 ).

2024Nonetheless, police may conduct a warrantless inventory search of a vehicle under the community caretaker exception if the following conditions are met: “1) the vehicle must be lawfully impounded; 2) the impoundment and subsequent search must be conducted pursuant to standard police procedures; and 3) the impoundment and subsequent search must not be a pretextual surrogate for an improper investigatory motive.” Id. at 784 (quoting Cantrell, 65 Va. App. at 59 ).

2002Cf. Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 392 , 98 S. Ct. 2408, 2413 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 (1970) (applying emergency aid doctrine to allow police entry of home after notification by resident of possible crime therein); Wood v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 21, 27-28 , 497 S.E.2d 484, 487 (1998) (en banc) (plurality op.) (noting neither United States Supreme Court nor any Virginia appellate court has applied the community caretaker doctrine to uphold entry of a private residence); Reynolds v. Commonwealth, 9 Va. App. 430, 435-39 , 388 S.E.2d 659, 662-64 (1990) (applying emergency doctrine as type of exigent

2002Cf. Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 392 , 98 S. Ct. 2408, 2413 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 (1970) (applying emergency aid doctrine to allow police entry of home after notification by resident of possible crime therein); Wood v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 21, 27-28 , 497 S.E.2d 484, 487 (1998) (en banc) (plurality op.) (noting neither United States Supreme Court nor any Virginia appellate court has applied the community caretaker doctrine to uphold entry of a private residence); Reynolds v. Commonwealth, 9 Va. App. 430, 435-39 , 388 S.E.2d 659, 662-64 (1990) (applying emergency doctrine as type of exigent

2005As recognized by the majority, “[i]t is axiomatic that the ‘physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.’ ” Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 748 , 104 S.Ct. 2091, 2097 , 80 L.Ed.2d 732 (1984) (quoting United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297, 313 , 92 S.Ct. 2125, 2134 , 32 L.Ed.2d 752 (1972)).

2005And, because the officers reasonably believed that their actions might be necessary to obtain emergency care for a member of the public, the - 16 - Commonwealth concludes that the entry was justified pursuant to the community caretaker doctrine.11 “It is axiomatic that the ‘physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.’” Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 748 (1984) (quoting United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297, 313 (1972)).

2005Citing Hill v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 1 , 441 S.E.2d 50 (1994), a case in which a panel of this Court authorized a warrantless entry premised on the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement, the majority concludes that “something more” was needed here.

2005Citing Hill v. Commonwealth, 18 Va.App. 1 , 441 S.E.2d 50 (1994), a case in which a panel of this Court authorized a warrantless entry premised on the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement, the majority concludes that “something more” was needed here.

2005As recognized by the majority, “[i]t is axiomatic that the ‘physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.’ ” Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 748 , 104 S.Ct. 2091, 2097 , 80 L.Ed.2d 732 (1984) (quoting United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297, 313 , 92 S.Ct. 2125, 2134 , 32 L.Ed.2d 752 (1972)).

2005And, because the officers reasonably believed that their actions might be necessary to obtain emergency care for a member of the public, the - 16 - Commonwealth concludes that the entry was justified pursuant to the community caretaker doctrine.11 “It is axiomatic that the ‘physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.’” Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 748 (1984) (quoting United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297, 313 (1972)).

2025Neither “in public” nor “intoxicated” are further defined in the criminal statute, but we have held that “the plain meaning” of “in public” is “a place in open view, visible to the community.” Crislip v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 66, 71 (2001).

2024As the Supreme Court explained in King, a “well-recognized exception [to the warrant requirement] applies when ‘“the exigencies of the situation” make the needs of law enforcement so compelling that [a] warrantless search is objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.’” 563 U.S. at 460 (second alteration in original) (quoting Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 394 (1978)).

2024See also United States v. Treisman, 71 F.4th 225, 232-34 (4th Cir. 2023) (upholding warrantless search of vehicle under the community-caretaker doctrine, stating that Caniglia “did not disturb the principle that police officers may conduct warrantless searches of vehicles when called on ‘to discharge noncriminal “community caretaking functions,” such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents’” (quoting Caniglia, 593 U.S. at 196 )).