Court challenges of roadside sobriety checkpoints are synopsized. Five out of a total of 12 cases found that the checkpoints conducted lacked one or more of the procedural safeguards. It was the methods used in the conduct of the checkpoint upon which adverse decisions were based. The cases show that the police officer's discretion at the location of the checkpoint was a primary concern. Four basic issues are identified in sobriety checkpoint cases: the need for checkpoints for detecting drunk drivers, deterring others, and reducing alcohol-related crashes; the manner in which the checkpoint is conducted; the discretion and supervision of field officers; and the effectiveness of such checkpoints. The critical steps in operational planning of checkpoints are discussed; detailed site planning based on accident data; the collection of detailed, reliable data on alcohol-related offenses and crashes in that location and jurisdiction; checkpoints should be planed with the advice of the prosecutor; and there must be evidence of effectiveness. (A)
Abstract