1. ) Is impoundment of a vehicle unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment when custody of
the vehicle was obtained by a misrepresentation with respect to a particular towing
agency that an officer is going to call to retrieve the vehicle?

2. ) Did non-disclosure of two NCIC Query searches of Petitioner 's license plate and one
name search of his identity violate Brady v. Maryland and shake the confidence in the
fairness of the contested omnibus hearing?

3. ) Was the Petitioner 's right to procedural due process as provided by the 14th amendment
violated when the Minnesota Court of Appeals refused to address his supplemental pro se
brief when he submitted his case to the trial court under Minnesota Rules of Criminal
Procedure 26.01, subdivision 4, which provides that he stipulate to the prosecution 's case
in order to obtain appellate review of the district court 's pretrial order, which the parties
agreed was dispositive?

4.) Does the United States Constitution allow an officer to justify his reasons for
impoundment, after the fact, when the Cass County Sheriffs Office provides the policy
and procedures for towing a vehicle which gets it authority from a State Statute that
mandates that this particular officer describe his reasons for towing in a written towing
report but fails to do so?

5.) Does the inventory search exception require a bright-line rule as presented in the reason
for granting the Writ of Certiorari?

Is impoundment of a vehicle unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment?