THIS ARTICLE ANALYZES THE AUTOMOBILE SEARCH AND SEIZURE DOCTRINE SET FORTH IN CHAMBERS V. MARONEY (1970) AND COLORADO DEPARTURE FROM THIS IMMOBILIZATION DOCTRINE. IN ABANDONING THE FEDERAL LAW, THE COLORADO COURT HAS PUT UNNECESSARY RESTRICTIONS UPON WARRANTLESS AUTOMOBILE SEARCHES WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. THE CHAMBERS CASE ESTABLISHED THAT WHERE POLICE HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE TO SEARCH A MOBILE VEHICLE, EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES ARE PRESENTED WHICH ALLOW THEM TO SEARCH IMMEDIATELY OR TO IMPOUND THE AUTOMOBILE WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A SEARCH WARRANT. THUS ONCE A VEHICLE IS IMPOUNDED, NO INVESTIGATORY SEARCH IS PERMISSIBLE UNTIL A WARRANT IS OBTAINED. THE DISSENT IN CHAMBERS ARGUED THAT WHEN PROBABLE CAUSED AND EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES ARE PRESENT, ONLY THE IMPOUNDMENT OF A VEHICLE SHOULD BE PERMITTED BEFORE POLICE OBTAIN A WARRANT. THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT, AFTER ADOPTING THE CHAMBERS IMMOBILIZATION DOCTRINE, APPEARS TO HAVE ABANDONED IT IN FAVOR OF THE TEST OF ARREST AND POLICE CUSTODY. THE POLICE CUSTODY TEST DOES NOT APPEAR TO OFFER THE PROCEDURAL BENEFITS OF EITHER THE MAJORITY OR DISSENTING OPINIONS IN CHAMBERS. THE ARTICLE SUGGESTS THAT THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT ATTEMPT TO CLARIFY THIS AREA OF THE LAW. FOOTNOTES ARE GIVEN. (MJW)