[Xplantdad]

Read this...very interesting...


https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...cv-00694-2.pdf

Plaintiffs do, however, have an ownership interest in the three other vehicles that were seized– a 1986 Monte Carlo, a 1970 Nova, and a 1970 Chevelle. Malone seized the Monte Carlo and the Nova because he noticed that their VIN plates were scratched, and the VIN plate on the Nova was partially bent. He believed that this constituted evidence of VIN tampering. Both vehicles were returned to Plaintiffs on January 6, 2006, after it was determined that the VIN plates had not been altered. (Malone Aff. ¶¶ 12-13).

Malone also authorized the seizure of a gold convertible found in Plaintiffs’ garage. TheVIN, 136670B198105, identified the car as a 1970 Chevelle. Malone had observed a stripped down vehicle frame out in the yard. Its VIN plate had been removed, but the confidential number stamped
into its firewall was visible.


This confidential number, 10B198105, which was in plain view, was
derivative of the VIN of the gold Chevelle in the garage. Malone concluded that the VIN plate had been removed from the stripped down vehicle and placed in the gold Chevelle to conceal the gold Chevelle’s true identity. Malone investigated further by removing a protective cover from the gold
Chevelle to uncover the confidential number stamped into its firewall. That confidential number, 12B626034, corresponded to VIN 1D67J2B626034, which Malone identified as a 1972 Chevelle. According to Malone, a 1970 Chevelle is worth much more than a 1972 Chevelle. He speculated that the VIN on the gold Chevelle had been replaced in order to make it appear more valuable than it really was. (Malone Aff. ¶¶ 16-17).




The vehicles that were seized were towed to an impound lot. Perry Stanley, Sr., was criminally charged with tampering with the VIN on the Chevelle. He moved to suppress the evidence. On April 3, 2007, the Licking County Court of Common Pleas granted the motion, finding that because the search exceeded the scope of the search warrant, the subsequent seizure was
illegal. (Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. Summ. J.). The prosecutor then dismissed the criminal charges.


Plaintiffs contend that the gold Chevelle suffered extensive damage as a result of improper storage conditions at the impound lot. It was eventually returned to Plaintiffs on July 17, 2007 pursuant to an order of the Licking County Court of Common Pleas. The court found that the car
was not contraband. It noted that although the VIN did not match the confidential number on the firewall, it appeared that the firewall, rather than the VIN plate, had been replaced, and that Perry Stanley, Sr. had a title to all of the relevant parts. (Ex. B to Pls.’ Reply).