Inland Empire DUI Checkpoints and Roadside Tests
|
California DUI Lawyers Helping Drivers Understand Legal Rights
Whether you are arrested for DUI after being pulled over by a police officer or you were forced to stop while driving through a sobriety checkpoint, you were likely asked to perform field sobriety tests (FSTs) and/or a roadside chemical or breath test prior to your arrest. The results of these forms of testing constitute critical evidence in DUI cases regardless of the circumstances of your stop and arrest. The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizures. This protection along with protections under the California Constitution are implicated by periods that you are detained at a roadblock or vehicle stop by an officer, so it is important to understand your rights. If you were arrested for a DUI, the California DMV allows 10 days of receipt of the license revocation notice for you to request a hearing. Call our Inland Empire DUI lawyers today to assist with saving your license and helping you navigate the DUI process.
|
DUI Checkpoints Map in San Bernardino & Riverside |
Legal Basis for Vehicle Stop in California
Generally, the police cannot stop vehicles and conduct drunk driving investigations based on mere suspicion in the absence of facts constituting probable cause that a crime is being committed, but sobriety checkpoints constitute an exception. Law enforcement officers will typically pull a vehicle over because of a traffic violation, vehicle defect that poses safety hazards or erratic driving. During the stop, the officer will ask questions, such as:
These types of questions serve two functions for the arresting officer. One objective of these questions is to induce you into providing incriminating information, such as evidence you have been drinking which will support “probable cause” for a DUI arrest. The other function of this questioning is to create an opportunity to note signs that you are impaired like red eyes, the odor or alcohol on your breath, impaired coordination or slurred speech. If the officer observed so-called signs of intoxication prior to or during your stop, the officer will ask you to perform FSTs.
Sobriety Roadblocks – Drunk Driving Exception to the 4th Amendment
Although sobriety checkpoints constitute seizures of your person under the Fourth Amendment, these traffic safety tools have been ruled legal by the Supreme Courts of the United States and California under the federal and California Constitution. California has found sobriety checkpoints to be lawful as “administrative inspections” like airport screenings rather than a traditional criminal investigative stop. The objective of sobriety roadblocks is to promote public safety and force alcohol impaired driver from the roadways. While sobriety checkpoints are considered an exception to the requirement of “probable cause” for a vehicle stop, there are strict rules that were established by the California Supreme Court in the seminal case of Ingersoll vs. Palmer.
The purpose of these rules is to balance public safety on our streets and highways against the intrusion on 4th Amendment interests of motorists. Collectively, the rules are intended to ensure a random screening process that limits the discretion of officers to arbitrarily stop and screen drivers. The following rules apply:
If the police do not observe characteristics of intoxication or answers that indicate intoxication of the driver, the motorist should be permitted to drive way without further delay. If the driver display signs of intoxication and/or provides incriminating responses, the driver will be directed to another area for FSTs. The driver cannot be lawfully arrested unless the officer has “probable cause” to believe the driver has committed DUI after the FSTs.
Our experienced Inland Empire Drunk Driving Lawyers understand the requirements for a lawful sobriety roadblock. If you were arrested at a DUI checkpoint, we carefully review and analyze the design and implementation of the checkpoint to find departures from the mandatory requirements. If the checkpoint is unlawful in terms of design, implementation or execution, all evidence obtained from the time of the stop might be excluded. This will result in dismissal of the DUI charge.
Generally, the police cannot stop vehicles and conduct drunk driving investigations based on mere suspicion in the absence of facts constituting probable cause that a crime is being committed, but sobriety checkpoints constitute an exception. Law enforcement officers will typically pull a vehicle over because of a traffic violation, vehicle defect that poses safety hazards or erratic driving. During the stop, the officer will ask questions, such as:
- Where are you coming from?
- Have you been drinking?
- Where are you headed?
- How much have you had to drink?
- Can I search your vehicle?
These types of questions serve two functions for the arresting officer. One objective of these questions is to induce you into providing incriminating information, such as evidence you have been drinking which will support “probable cause” for a DUI arrest. The other function of this questioning is to create an opportunity to note signs that you are impaired like red eyes, the odor or alcohol on your breath, impaired coordination or slurred speech. If the officer observed so-called signs of intoxication prior to or during your stop, the officer will ask you to perform FSTs.
Sobriety Roadblocks – Drunk Driving Exception to the 4th Amendment
Although sobriety checkpoints constitute seizures of your person under the Fourth Amendment, these traffic safety tools have been ruled legal by the Supreme Courts of the United States and California under the federal and California Constitution. California has found sobriety checkpoints to be lawful as “administrative inspections” like airport screenings rather than a traditional criminal investigative stop. The objective of sobriety roadblocks is to promote public safety and force alcohol impaired driver from the roadways. While sobriety checkpoints are considered an exception to the requirement of “probable cause” for a vehicle stop, there are strict rules that were established by the California Supreme Court in the seminal case of Ingersoll vs. Palmer.
The purpose of these rules is to balance public safety on our streets and highways against the intrusion on 4th Amendment interests of motorists. Collectively, the rules are intended to ensure a random screening process that limits the discretion of officers to arbitrarily stop and screen drivers. The following rules apply:
- Supervising officers rather than field officers must make decisions regarding the location, timing and operation of roadblocks.
- The system for stopping vehicles must be based on a neutral mathematical basis, such as every third vehicle or the first ten of every twenty vehicles.
- Checkpoints must be located in areas known for DUI collisions and arrests.
- Safety considerations for motorists and officers must be observed in the location and design of the roadblock.
- “Good judgment” must be exercised in terms of the time and day based on balancing potential effectiveness against intrusiveness for drivers.
- Sufficient warnings of the official nature of the checkpoint must exist to minimize surprise, such as flashing lights, warning signs, squad cars or uniformed officers.
- The stop must be of short duration which allows brief questioning and observation of signs of alcohol intoxication.
- DUI roadblocks should be advertised to maximize deterrent effect and to reduce motorists’ surprise and fear.
If the police do not observe characteristics of intoxication or answers that indicate intoxication of the driver, the motorist should be permitted to drive way without further delay. If the driver display signs of intoxication and/or provides incriminating responses, the driver will be directed to another area for FSTs. The driver cannot be lawfully arrested unless the officer has “probable cause” to believe the driver has committed DUI after the FSTs.
Our experienced Inland Empire Drunk Driving Lawyers understand the requirements for a lawful sobriety roadblock. If you were arrested at a DUI checkpoint, we carefully review and analyze the design and implementation of the checkpoint to find departures from the mandatory requirements. If the checkpoint is unlawful in terms of design, implementation or execution, all evidence obtained from the time of the stop might be excluded. This will result in dismissal of the DUI charge.
Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs)
There are only three field sobriety tests that have been recognized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as providing a reliable indication of intoxication: (1) one-leg stand, (2) walk and turn and (3) horizontal gaze nystagmus. There are strict procedures that govern how these tests, referred to as “Standardized Field Sobriety Tests” (SFSTs) must be conducted and evaluated. Many officers lack adequate training or fail to comply with these procedures undermining the reliability of the tests.
Regardless of the training of the officer, each of these SFSTs has a fairly high risk of false positive results. The one-leg stand and walk and turn are difficult tests that require physical coordination that would be difficult to flawlessly perform under the best possible conditions. When you trying to perform these SFSTs, the environment and circumstances combined with the officer’s expectations essentially assure you will fail. Circumstances that make failure likely include:
Because the officer is looking for evidence to establish probable cause of intoxication, the officer will be quick to find a mistake as failure regardless of how perfectly the rest of the tasks are performed. Even if a driver fails field sobriety testing, there are many reasons that a driver might perform poorly that have nothing to do with intoxication, such as:
When all of these factors are taken into consideration, field sobriety tests constitute an extremely unreliable basis for determining if a driver is impaired by drugs or alcohol. Our California DUI attorneys make sure that these shortcomings of SFSTs are made clear to the judge or jury.
Arrested at a DUI Checkpoint – Speak to an Experienced DUI Lawyer
If you are arrested at a DUI checkpoint or after being pulled over, you should contact an experienced DUI lawyer to learn about your rights and legal options. Our listed attorneys offer aggressive defense to intoxicated driving related charges.
Regardless of the training of the officer, each of these SFSTs has a fairly high risk of false positive results. The one-leg stand and walk and turn are difficult tests that require physical coordination that would be difficult to flawlessly perform under the best possible conditions. When you trying to perform these SFSTs, the environment and circumstances combined with the officer’s expectations essentially assure you will fail. Circumstances that make failure likely include:
- Proximity to traffic
- Darkness
- Inappropriate clothing or footwear
- Uneven ground
- Stress of the situation
Because the officer is looking for evidence to establish probable cause of intoxication, the officer will be quick to find a mistake as failure regardless of how perfectly the rest of the tasks are performed. Even if a driver fails field sobriety testing, there are many reasons that a driver might perform poorly that have nothing to do with intoxication, such as:
- Illness
- Injury
- Obesity
- Disability
- Anxiety
When all of these factors are taken into consideration, field sobriety tests constitute an extremely unreliable basis for determining if a driver is impaired by drugs or alcohol. Our California DUI attorneys make sure that these shortcomings of SFSTs are made clear to the judge or jury.
Arrested at a DUI Checkpoint – Speak to an Experienced DUI Lawyer
If you are arrested at a DUI checkpoint or after being pulled over, you should contact an experienced DUI lawyer to learn about your rights and legal options. Our listed attorneys offer aggressive defense to intoxicated driving related charges.
