Under these circumstances, the officer's decision to prohibit Davis from driving his car was not improper. The next question, therefore, is whether the impoundment of the vehicle was proper. See Grizzle v. State, 310 Ga.App. 577, 579 –580(1), n. 18, 713 S.E.2d 701 (2011) (absent proof that motorcyle was insured, it “could not be lawfully driven by anyone”); Dover v. State, 307 Ga.App. 126, 128(1)(a), 704 S.E.2d 235 (2010) (“the vehicle was not insured, so it could not be driven”). We note that the State does not argue that police searched the car incident to Davis's arrest, and there was no evidence that Officer Choudhery placed Davis under arrest before he fled the scene.
" With these guiding principles in mind, we will now address Grizzle's enumerations of error in turn. Dover v. State, 307 Ga. App. 126, 127 (1) ( 704 SE2d 235) (2010) (punctuation and footnote omitted).Polizzotto v. State, 248 Ga. App. 814, 816 (1) ( 547 SE2d 390) (2001) (citation and punctuation omitted).
(Citation, punctuation and footnote omitted.) Dover v. State, 307 Ga.App. 126, 128(1)(a), 704 S.E.2d 235 (2010). The record shows that Capellan was the sole occupant of an out-of-state vehicle governed by the Department of Transportation and required a special commercial driver's license (CDL) to drive.