Bailey, J.
….
In this case, Officer Raisovich, a twenty-three-year veteran of IMPD and the Marion County Sheriff’s Department, testified that his decision to impound [the borrowed car defendant Lampley was driving] based on the totality of the circumstances was in keeping “with our procedures in that situation.” (Tr. 11.) We are thus not confronted with a complete lack of evidence about the policy, as was the case in Berry [v. State, 967 N.E.2d 87, 92 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012)]. And while perhaps introduction of the formal, written policy would have been helpful to evaluate and expand upon Officer Raisovich’s testimony, we cannot forget that the ultimate test of constitutionality in inventory cases is reasonableness. Fair [v. State, 627 N.E.2d 427, 431 (Ind. 1993)]. “In determining the reasonableness of an inventory search, courts must examine all the facts and circumstances of a case.” Id. Here, the police initiated a traffic stop of an unsafe car, which was in the sole possession of a driver with suspended privileges who did not own the vehicle. As a result of the driver’s arrest for the driving-related offense, the car would be left unattended for an unknown period of time. The officer testified that, based on the totality of the circumstances, police procedure provided for impoundment in that situation. Under these circumstances, we hold that Officer Raisovich’s decision to impound the vehicle was reasonable [under the Fourth Amendment].
….
Despite the different analytical framework, our supreme court has found that the factors that speak to the reasonableness of an inventory search under the Fourth Amendment are also relevant to the reasonableness of an inventory search under Article 1, Section 11. See Taylor, 842 N.E.2d at 334 (holding that “the factors leading to our conclusion that impounding [the defendant’s] car was not warranted by police administrative caretaking functions [under the Fourth Amendment analysis] support the conclusion that the requirements of the Indiana Constitution were violated as well”). For the same reasons the search in this case was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, the officer’s decision to impound and conduct an inventory search of the car Wilford was driving was reasonable under Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. [Footnote omitted.]
….
Affirmed.
Baker, J., and Bradford, J., concur.