Can a Shoplifter's Car be Impounded

My question involves criminal law for the state of: All US States.

If you catch a thief shoplifting have you ever thought of calling the Towing Company to impound the car of the thief? It would be well within your right to do so and would make the thief think twice about not shoplifting from you when he or she has to pay to get the car out of the lot+towing/storage feels as well as transportation to th lot. This would be in addition to their Civil Demand/Legal Fees.

Heck I think more LP's should require the License Plate of the Car of the thief and while they are being detained call and impound their car too. Surprise Surprise where is my Car? Oh S--- its been towed.

In addition I think the DMV should consider revoking the license for 6 months first offenders if they used their car to try and conceal the items.

Whats your take on this?

Most private parking lots do not conform to their state laws in a manner that would allow this to happen. Many states do not have laws that would allow this. A police department is unlikely to go so far as to attempt a civil forfeiture and attempt to argue the proceeds of shoplifting paid for the car.

Uh ... okay, just a shot here, but under what lawful authority (i.e. law) would the business have to impound someone's car if they are suspected of theft???

Oh, and the DMV couldn't begin to "consider revoking the license for 6 months" unless the state legislature passes a law allowing this upon a conviction.

While intriguing ideas, there might be Constitutional issues for impounding a car from a parking lot because the defendant was detained or arrested, and since the police cannot generally tow the car of someone arrested when the vehicle is not directly related to the immediate offense, then granting this authority to a private entity is at least as questionable. And the license suspension might be an interesting additional penalty, it may have little practical effect on theft as someone intent on theft is not too likely to be deterred from driving simply for not having a license. But, if you can sell these to your state's legislature, go ahead. The latter would probably be easier than the former.

Quote:

---

Quoting travelplus

---

My question involves criminal law for the state of: All US States.

If you catch a thief shoplifting have you ever thought of calling the Towing Company to impound the car of the thief? It would be well within your right to do so and would make the thief think twice about not shoplifting from you when he or she has to pay to get the car out of the lot+towing/storage feels as well as transportation to th lot. This would be in addition to their Civil Demand/Legal Fees.

Heck I think more LP's should require the License Plate of the Car of the thief and while they are being detained call and impound their car too. Surprise Surprise where is my Car? Oh S--- its been towed.

In addition I think the DMV should consider revoking the license for 6 months first offenders if they used their car to try and conceal the items.

Whats your take on this?

---

Since shoplifting is such a heinous crime we should take all of those measures and also add the following punishments:

Tar and feather.
Pillory.
Ride out of town on a rail.
Cut off their hands.
Draw and quarter.
Sacrifice their first born.
Impale them on stakes in the parking lot as a warning to other would-be shoplifters. Vlad Tsepes made good use of that technique.

That enough for you?

In this state it's possible but doesn't often happen. The store COULD do it if the lot is signed correctly as private property subject to towing. Most aren't and most stores aren't going to mess with it.

The police COULD do it incident to an arrest, but there's usually no practical reason to do it and only creates more work for them - although about 10 years ago it made news that a certain mall had partnered with the police and the police agreed to do this for every shoplifter to make a point.

I do agree with you that it would be useful for the legislature to impose license suspensions with those who use a vehicle to flee after a shoplifting incident or to hide merchandise. We already suspend licenses for gas theft. I suggest you write to your legislators.

Also, towing cars is HARDLY tantamount to tarring and feathering or executions for theft. I don't think the idea is that ridiculous.

We did, on occasion with difficult shoplifters, tell mall security where their car was. Mall security then told them that they had 24 hours to get it moved or it would be towed, which was their policy anyway. They just made sure that at 24 hours, that shoplifter's car was gone.

We did it in conjunction with the local PD once when someone was illegally backed into a handicapped space (so that they could be close to the store when they did a grab and run and fled.)

Other than that, I think we also did it one time for a "difficult" shoplifter at Christmas time. The guy was a real you know what, and was parked relatively close to the doors, but legally. But I mentioned to the officer, who was also fed up with the guys attitude, that it was BS for him to occupy a prime parking spot on a Saturday morning during the holiday season while he sat in jail until he could make bond. The officer agreed.

Not being in loss prevention, I don't know how practical it is or what laws would have to be enacted/changed for it to happen, but I rather like the idea of a license suspension for 16 and 17 year old shoplifters overall.

I have been very vocal and come down quite hard on a lot of shoplifting teenagers on the need for there to be some real consequences for theft, which we do not currently have. I do not apologize for that; nor do I see myself changing my position anytime soon.

But I'm not determined that it leave the kid with a criminal record, either. For the third-time shoplifter, yeah, maybe that's the only thing that will get through. But I'm not THAT hard-hearted; if there's a way to make a real, lasting impression on a kid who bent to peer pressure or an impulse and got caught on their first criminal outing, that doesn't leave the kid with a record, I have no problem with that.

A drivers license is a real status symbol, and having to be driven where you're going by your parents is the kiss of death. A drivers' license suspension, along with a requirement that there must be a parent or other adult over 21 in the car (thus eliminating joy-riding with friends) for a six month period will certainly make an impression. It will also cause some inconvenience to the parents, thus making sure that Kiddo is given plenty of parental reinforcement on the perils of committing crimes. Those between 18-21 could be given the license suspension, but not have any restrictions about who is and is not in any car they may be a passenger in.

I don't have any suggestions for multiple offenders or over 21s, but I do like this idea for the youngsters. What I care about is that there be some consequences that will make an impression - I don't much care if they involve a criminal record or not.

Quote:

---

Quoting DeputyDog

---

In this state it's possible but doesn't often happen. The store COULD do it if the lot is signed correctly as private property subject to towing. Most aren't and most stores aren't going to mess with it.

---

I'm curious what state you are in.

Okay, one consideration is that the parking lot is generally not controlled by the businesses in malls and shopping centers, so they would have no authority to have a vehicle impounded for violating whatever terms might have been posted at the front.

Additionally, would ALL crimes committed on the property revoke access? Or just shoplifting? Skateboarding, domestic violence, possession of marijuana or other drugs, open containers of alcohol - all of these can be similarly punishable offenses to shoplifting (depending on state and statute), so would they ALL be subject to a tow?

Quote:

---

The police COULD do it incident to an arrest, but there's usually no practical reason to do it and only creates more work for them - although about 10 years ago it made news that a certain mall had partnered with the police and the police agreed to do this for every shoplifter to make a point.

---

Yeah, that must have been before the courts weighed in on the matter. The 9th Circuit and California state courts have determined that the authority to tow is insufficient to tow a vehicle - there must also be a community caretaking interest. Federal courts are split on this. Plus, the USSC has ruled in 2009 that a search of a vehicle has to be directly related to the offense and there would have to be reason to believe that evidence of the crime for which the person was arrested is in the vehicle AND, of course, an exigency would have to be articulated. So, since the police cannot search a car of a suspect arrested inside the store, it is logical to assume that they would have a difficult time SEIZING it.

Quote:

---

I do agree with you that it would be useful for the legislature to impose license suspensions with those who use a vehicle to flee after a shoplifting incident or to hide merchandise. We already suspend licenses for gas theft. I suggest you write to your legislators.

---

Changing the law is about the only way this could be done without great civil litigation. And the only one that makes any practical sense would be the driver's license suspension.

Quote:

---

Also, towing cars is HARDLY tantamount to tarring and feathering or executions for theft. I don't think the idea is that ridiculous.

---

I believe it is clearly a punitive action and an action (seizing one's personal property as punishment) taken without due process. As such, any such law would very likely face Constitutional challenges.

So far we have three people here in favor of license suspensions. Write a note to your legislators. That is the only way they will get the idea, debate it, and possibly enact it.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

I'm curious what state you are in.

Okay, one consideration is that the parking lot is generally not controlled by the businesses in malls and shopping centers, so they would have no authority to have a vehicle impounded for violating whatever terms might have been posted at the front.

Additionally, would ALL crimes committed on the property revoke access? Or just shoplifting? Skateboarding, domestic violence, possession of marijuana or other drugs, open containers of alcohol - all of these can be similarly punishable offenses to shoplifting (depending on state and statute), so would they ALL be subject to a tow?


Yeah, that must have been before the courts weighed in on the matter. The 9th Circuit and California state courts have determined that the authority to tow is insufficient to tow a vehicle - there must also be a community caretaking interest. Federal courts are split on this. Plus, the USSC has ruled in 2009 that a search of a vehicle has to be directly related to the offense and there would have to be reason to believe that evidence of the crime for which the person was arrested is in the vehicle AND, of course, an exigency would have to be articulated. So, since the police cannot search a car of a suspect arrested inside the store, it is logical to assume that they would have a difficult time SEIZING it.


Changing the law is about the only way this could be done without great civil litigation. And the only one that makes any practical sense would be the driver's license suspension.


I believe it is clearly a punitive action and an action (seizing one's personal property as punishment) taken without due process. As such, any such law would very likely face Constitutional challenges.

---

Yeah, California, especially the courts, can be a little "different." (no offense)

I'm in Ohio. As far as the business doing it, Ohio law lays out requirements for signage, and a pre-agreement with a tow company, and in turn, rates for the tow/storage must be posted on the property as a warning. A sign posted saying that parking is for customers only, or even with conditions (PAYING customers only, or "anyone committing a crime is subject to tow," etc.) could make it fair game for a store to tow the vehicle. Most department stores own their parking lots, or at least lease them, giving them the same rights in the lot for the duration of the lease. Now a store IN the mall like Forever 21? They don't properly have a "parking lot" of their own and cannot do this.

As for law enforcement, I'm not up on the latest case law here, but I do know that it's generally been held reasonable to tow a car incident to an arrest if some reason can be articulated for it. Courts here have generally been loathe to second guess an officer's reasons for doing so, as long as it seems reasonable on the face of it. So if an officer articulated something to the effect of "The subject was taking up a prime parking spot that the business needed for paying customers while the store was busy, and I also did not want to risk the subject having to go back onto their property and possibly commit more crimes once there in retaliation," I could easily see that being sufficient to make the judgment call to tow.

An inventory search is still good here - to protect the interests of the subject and police. Any contraband found during inventory is fair game.

As for being a punitive action without due process, I have to disagree with you. You could make that argument about many matters of police discretion. Is physically arresting a shoplifter to take them to jail merely punitive as well, when you could just as easily issue a cite? What about towing the car of someone speeding 40 mph over the speed limit, because you believe he will continue to do so after being released? Police have discretion on some matters, and I think that's a good thing.