• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

SJ DUI Checkpoints not announced

beaker

beaker

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
Moto(s)
01 SV
From the merc...

http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_11199603

San Jose police are planning a drunken-driving checkpoint tonight, and this time they're not telling you where.

As an annual holiday DUI crackdown gets under way, San Jose's finest are breaking with past practice and not announcing where they will be setting up roadblocks and stopping drivers. Although most police departments tell the public where checkpoints will be, the California Supreme Court has ruled that they don't have to.
 
I've never seen one that said where it was. Just that they're having one. The closest I've seen to "where it is" was "in the southern part of the City".
 
Perhaps Im mistaken (and it has been a while since Ive dealt with that little area of the law) but aren't they (the PD) required to post something more specific than "we're out there...umm...somwhere...but we won't say where" in order to avoid having their case tossed?

It reminds me of some other jurisdiction that did something which I thought was worse. They set up DUI checkpoints and then asked the local bicycle coalition to post all the info.:wow Surprisingly, nothing was ever posted.
 
In N.C. and FL they MUST post it in the paper, something about entrapment if I remember correctly, doesn't matter to me, I'm married, therefore I never get out of the house.
 
Baychilla said:
Perhaps Im mistaken (and it has been a while since Ive dealt with that little area of the law) but aren't they (the PD) required to post something more specific than "we're out there...umm...somwhere...but we won't say where" in order to avoid having their case tossed?

It reminds me of some other jurisdiction that did something which I thought was worse. They set up DUI checkpoints and then asked the local bicycle coalition to post all the info.:wow Surprisingly, nothing was ever posted.
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
•DUI/DL CHECKPOINT- Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 2100-0300, City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 2100-0200, City of Los Gatos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 2100-0200, City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 2100-0200, City of Los Gatos/Monte Sereno
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 12th, City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 12th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI/DL CHECKPOINT- Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 2100-0300, City of Milpitas
•DUI/DL CHECKPOINT- Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 2100-0300. City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 CHP
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 13th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sun, Dec 14th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sun, Dec 14th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Mon, Dec 15th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Tues, Dec 16th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed, Dec 17th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Thur, Dec 18th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Sunnyvale
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 CHP
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Cupertino
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Saratoga
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Los Altos Hills
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Milpitas
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 19th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI/DL CHECKPOINT. (Mini-Grant Ops) - Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 1900-0300, City of Sunnyvale
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 CHP
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of Cupertino
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of Saratoga
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of Los Altos Hills
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 20th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sun, Dec 21st, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sun, Dec 21st, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sun, Dec 21st, 2008 City of Gilroy
•Maximum Enforcement Period – Mon, Dec 22-26th, 2008 - CHP
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Mon, Dec 22nd, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Tues, Dec 23rd, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed, Dec 24th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 24th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Thur, Dec 25th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Thur, Dec 25th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Thur Dec 25th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri Dec 26th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri Dec 26th, 2008 City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Fri Dec 26th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 City of Cupertino
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 City of Saratoga
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 City of Los Altos Hills
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Fri, Dec 26th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat Dec 27th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat Dec 27th, 2008 City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sat Dec 27th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 2100 – 0300 City of Morgan Hill
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 City of Cupertino
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 City of Saratoga
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 City of Los Altos Hills
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sat, Dec 27th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sun Dec 28th, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Sun Dec 28th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Sun, Dec 28th, 2008 City of Gilroy
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Mon Dec 29th, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Tues Dec 30th, 2008 2100 – 0200 City of Los Gatos/Monte Sereno
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Tues Dec 30th, City of Palo Alto
•DUI/DL CHECKPOINT - Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 2100-0300, City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed Dec 31st, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed Dec 31st, 2008 City of Los Altos
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed Dec 31st, 2008 City of Sunnyvale
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed Dec 31st, 2008 2100 -0200 City of Los Gatos/Monte Sereno
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Wed Dec 31st, 2008 City of Palo Alto
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 CHP
•Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 Unincorporated Santa Clara County
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 City of Cupertino
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 City of Saratoga
•DUI Cars/Roving Patrols – Wed, Dec 31st, 2008 City of Los Altos Hills
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Thur Jan 1st, 2008 City of San Jose
•DUI Saturation Patrols - Thur Jan 1st, 2008 City of Palo Alto
 
JPM said:
Nope.
Click to expand...
Does anyone have more info on this?

The legality of DUI checkpoints has been discussed ad nauseum on Barf, but the answer to all the "No PC for the stop!" arguments seemed to be that the location was posted in the local paper and an escape route is always available to motorists, there by making the stop voluntary. Is this inaccurate?
 
taranis said:
Does anyone have more info on this?

The legality of DUI checkpoints has been discussed ad nauseum on Barf, but the answer to all the "No PC for the stop!" arguments seemed to be that the location was posted in the local paper and an escape route is always available to motorists, there by making the stop voluntary. Is this inaccurate?
Click to expand...


You got Google? :twofinger


The Supreme Court identified eight factors that minimize the intrusiveness on the individual, while balancing the needs of society to keep drunk drivers off the road.

According to the Ingersoll decision, the establishment and location of sobriety checkpoints must be decided by supervisory police officers, not officers in the field. This requirement is important to reduce the potential for arbitrary and random enforcement.

The Supreme Court’s ruling also placed limits on the discretion of police to stop drivers at checkpoints. Police must use a neutral mathematical formula, such as every driver, or every third, fifth, or tenth driver to determine who to stop. This requirement takes away the discretion of the individual officer to choose to stop individual drivers without any legitimate basis.

Police also must give primary consideration to maintaining safety for motorists and officers. In order to minimize the risk of danger to motorists and police, proper lighting, warning signs and signals, and clearly identifiable official vehicles and personnel are required. The checkpoint should only be operated when the traffic volume allows the operation to be conducted safely.

The locations of roadblocks also are regulated. A supervisory officer must choose a location that will be most effective in actually stopping drunk drivers, such as roads which have a high incidence of alcohol-related accidents and arrests.

The time and duration of sobriety checkpoints also are of key importance. Police are expected to exercise good judgment in setting times and durations, with an eye to effectiveness of the operation, and with the safety of motorists in mind. As long as these considerations are in effect, there are no hard and fast rules as to the timing or duration of the roadblock.

Sobriety checkpoints also must be established with high visibility so that drivers can easily see the nature of the roadblock. The features that promote high visibility include flashing warning lights, adequate lighting, police vehicles, and the presence of uniformed officers. Not only are such factors important for safety reasons, but advance warning will reassure motorists that the stop is duly authorized.

Police operating sobriety roadblocks should detain each motorist only long enough for the officer to question the driver briefly and to look for signs of intoxication, such as alcohol on the breath, slurred speech, and glassy or bloodshot eyes. If the driver does not display signs of impairment, he or she should be permitted to drive on without further delay. If the officer does observe signs of impairment, the driver may be directed to a separate area for a field sobriety test. At that point, further investigation must be based on probable cause, and general principles of detention and arrest would apply.

Police conducting a lawful sobriety checkpoint must provide advance notice of the roadblock to the public, although they are not required to disclose its specific location. Publicity both reduces the intrusiveness of the stop and increases the deterrent effect of the roadblock. The thought is that advance notice limits intrusion upon the individual’s personal dignity and security because those stopped would anticipate and understand what was happening. Further, advance publicity serves to establish the legitimacy of roadblocks in the minds of motorists.

The Supreme Court also stated that motorists who seek to avoid a roadblock may not be stopped and detained merely because they attempted to avoid the roadblock. However, if the motorist commits a vehicle code violation or displays obvious signs of intoxication, there is adequate probable cause to pull over the motorist, after which point general principles of detention and arrest apply.
 
JPM said:
The checkpoint should only be operated when the traffic volume allows the operation to be conducted safely.

Sobriety checkpoints also must be established with high visibility so that drivers can easily see the nature of the roadblock. The features that promote high visibility include flashing warning lights, adequate lighting, police vehicles, and the presence of uniformed officers. Not only are such factors important for safety reasons, but advance warning will reassure motorists that the stop is duly authorized.
Click to expand...

interesting tidbits there. down here, the checkpoints seem to often be in areas where there's NOT a lot of streetlights, and most of the paraphernalia (including the majority of the motors/cruisers and tow trucks) is tucked where it's mostly out of sight behind buildings. many times the signage for the checkpoint is significantly beyond any possible exits, and generally the only warning lights are the led road flares where they narrow the lanes into the checkpoint.

also, jumping back to the first part, i wonder what a "safe volume of traffic" is; especially this time of year, to allow the officers to be spread thinner over more checkpoints, they'll have a 3 lane street narrowed down to one lane through the checkpoint, and i've seen half-hour-plus gridlock because of it.

:nerd
 
You should post that in the DUI thread over in General :twofinger. jk. I was not complaining, only asking. It seems that this is no longer the right internet resource to use though, I will stick to google from now on.
 
Last edited:
JPM, I found your source!

A DUI-focused defense attorney's site. :laughing

Another tidbit the site offers:
California lawmakers passed a second law pertaining to DUI / DWI and driver's license applications. Beginning July 1, 2008, everyone who is applying for a new driver's license or renewal in California will be required to acknowledge in writing that drunk-driving resulting in death can result in the driver facing murder charges. If the driver is later accused of causing death while driving under the influence, this written admission will be used as evidence.
Click to expand...

I suppose the acknowledgment is just another form?
 
JPM said:
The Supreme Court also stated that motorists who seek to avoid a roadblock may not be stopped and detained merely because they attempted to avoid the roadblock. However, if the motorist commits a vehicle code violation or displays obvious signs of intoxication, there is adequate probable cause to pull over the motorist, after which point general principles of detention and arrest apply.
Click to expand...

A vehicle code violation, such as performing a u-turn in the middle of the block across a double-yellow?
 
Zephyr40k said:
A vehicle code violation, such as performing a u-turn in the middle of the block across a double-yellow?
Click to expand...

Yup. The motors job at our checkpoints is to work the turn off's (We usually get more drunks than go through the checkpoint). The two major violations we see and turning through the cone pattern to avoid it or making an illegal turn (usually from the wrong lane) when they jam on the brakes at the street just before the checkpoint.:laughing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top