New Hampshire DWI Checkpoint Debate Continues

The Seacoast Online continues to cover the ongoing debate about the Constitutionality of DWI checkpoints. On one side is the protection of the Fourth Amendment; on the other side is the role of law enforcement to ensure the protection of its citizens.

Proponents of the checkpoints argue that the minor infringement of the Fourth Amendment is worth the greater cause of reducing drunk driving. Clearly this poses as issue when the government decides the degree of which infringements are acceptable.

In 1990, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled DWI roadblocks were in violation of the Fourth Amendment, but in a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted checkpoints to be Constitutional.

So what is a properly conducted checkpoint mean? DWI checkpoints are supposed to be random, and the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration has issued guidelines in an effort to curb overly intrusive behavior on the part of law enforcement. These guidelines and standards from Ingersoll v. Palmer (43 Cal.3d 1321 (1987)) include:

  • Decision-making must be at a supervisory level, rather than by officers in the field.
  • A neutral formula must be used to select vehicles to be stopped, such as every vehicle or every third vehicle, rather than leaving it up the officer in the field.
  • Primary consideration must be given to public and officer safety.
  • The site should be selected by policy-making officials, based upon areas having a high incidence of drunk driving.
  • Limitations on when the checkpoint is to be conducted and for how long, bearing in mind both effectiveness and intrusiveness.
  • Warning lights and signs should be clearly visible.
  • Length of detention of motorists should be minimized.
  • Advance publicity is necessary to reduce the intrusiveness of the checkpoint and increase its deterrent effect.

The reduction of drunk driving is an admirable cause, and you’ll be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn’t support educational efforts. Law enforcement, rehabilitation programs and national education efforts are helping to educate Americans about the reality of drunk driving.

Fortunately, these drunk-driving reduction efforts have had a positive impact. The national percentage of alcohol-related motor vehicle fatalities has declined from 60 percent in 1982 to 37 percent in 2007. On a state level, New Hampshire has a slightly higher rate; 40 percent of all automobile fatalities are alcohol-related.

As the debate moves forward, I hope a proper balance remains between Constitutionality and safety. The moment an individual’s rights are taken away in an effort to “protect citizens” is the moment our government has stepped beyond its boundaries and become a police state.

States Continue to Crackdown on DWI Enforcement

In Texas, DWI enforcement just got a little bit tougher.

Last week a new statutory bill passed the Texas state senate. The bill, the Nicole “Lilly” Lalime Act, does three main things:

  1. Expands the definition of offenses committed while intoxicated to include operating water crafts, which were previously not covered.
  2. If an officer has reason to believe suspect has a prior DWI conviction or a child is in the car, the law permits the officer to collect breath and blood sample without a warrant.
  3. Law has also been expanded to allow any magistrate who is a state-licensed attorney to issue a blood search warrant — and such magistrates are at the jail 24/7

The new law goes into effect in September.

Source: Dallas Observer

DWI Checkpoints Ruled Legal but Challenges Expected to Continue

The legality of DWI checkpoints has come into question in a number of recent New Hampshire cases.

One such case came into question last summer when more than 800 cars were pulled over at various checkpoints across the state of New Hampshire. Ten arrests were made from these stops, and a guilty verdict with regard to the arrest of Christopher Shields was just issued this week, declaring checkpoints to be statutorily legal.

According to the Boston Herald, the attorney for this particular case claimed the “roadblock was illegal because the process by which cars were stopped was not random as required by law.” The Judge decided otherwise.

District Court Judge Morrison did not issue an official decision with his verdict. Essentially, this decision provides there is no legal precedent from which future cases can cite. While prosecutors claim Judge Morrison’’s decision paves the way toward a consensus on DWI checkpoint legality, police officers expect challenges with checkpoint arrests to continue.

New Hampshire residents should expect to see many more checkpoints over the course of the summer, and potentially this Memorial Day Weekend. While some residents may be outraged or question checkpoint legality, the important point to remember is safety. If you are not safe to drive, don”t drive. It may seem to be common sense, but most of us have been in the position of making unsafe decisions.

College Safe Ride Programs Prevent Drinking and Driving

College students drink. Each year the Top 10 Party Universities list is released, and parents groan at the thought of their child drinking and getting behind the wheel. Fortunately, many universities have campus-sponsored transportation systems to decrease the likelihood of students driving while intoxicated.

While no university promotes reckless drinking, they all understand students are often faced with unsafe situations when involved in weekend festivities. A proactive approach is a form of the “safe ride” program, paid alongside tuition within the laundry list of student fees. You pay for them and these are lifesaving services worth being aware of and using.

Fortunately for New Hampshire residents, the University of NH in Durham offers a similar safe ride program. As a safe back-up plain, the UNH Safe Ride website states the program is “for UNH students who drove their car to a social gathering/event and need a sober ride home.” The program won’t drive you to the bar, but it will get you home safely if walking is not an option. In this instance, a parking ticket is much more preferable than a DWI.

Large schools such as the University of Texas at Austin have partnered with Capital Metro transportation to offer shuttle routes on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturday evenings. These bus routes travel to and from major entertainment localities throughout Austin, providing students safe, free transportation to and from bars and music venues. If you’re been unable to locate these services, check with your university’s health and wellness department.

Each school has a different means for providing safe, free transportation to students who have been drinking. If you are a student, it’s worth the time to acquaint yourself with the services at your university. Parents are also encouraged to explore these services and reach out to their children to educate them about the risks of drinking and driving.

Keep in mind this is not a personal taxi service, but a valuable alternative when you may be in a tight situation. Drinking and driving should never be an option.