In an effort to keep drunk drivers off the road, police officers have resorted to using random checkpoints to find drunk drivers. At these random stops, officers will look to see if they can find any drivers who they believe are driving intoxicated and those drivers are subsequently arrested and charged with DUI. While officers continue to use these checkpoints, the Supreme Court held in the City of Indianapolis v. Edmond that using checkpoints for the sole purpose of finding drunk drivers is unconstitutional. If you are facing a DUI charge, it is absolutely essential that you hire a DUI attorney in Detroit who understands this case law and knows how to attack the use of these unconstitutional checkpoints in court.
The Key to Attacking the Constitutionality of DUI Checkpoints
It is important to note that the use of checkpoints in and of themselves is not unconstitutional. Police officers often use checkpoints when looking for wanted suspects or to find unlicensed drivers. In order for your DUI attorney in Detroit to challenge the constitutionality of the checkpoint, your DUI lawyer in Detroit must be able to show that the sole purpose of the checkpoint was to find and catch drunk drivers.
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond also requires that in order for a DUI checkpoint to be found unconstitutional, the purpose of the checkpoint must be found at the “progommatic level.” This means that testimony from street officers who may have been assisting with the checkpoint will not be sufficient. Your DUI attorney in Detroit must question an officer who was in charge of the operation’s plan and implementation (such as a sergeant).
Using Questioning to Attack the Checkpoint’s Constitutionality
In order to attack the constitutionality of the checkpoint, your DUI attorney in Detroit will question any testifying officers as to the purpose behind the checkpoint. The questioning may proceed as follows:
DUI attorney in Detroit: Sergeant, did you conduct the DUI checkpoint?
Police Sergeant: Yes I did.
DUI attorney in Detroit: And did you plan the checkpoint?
Police Sergeant: Yes I did.
DUI attorney in Detroit: So you were the one who determined when and where the checkpoint would be held?
Police Sergeant: Yes I did. I have planned a number of checkpoints in the past and was in charge of this one as well.
DUI attorney in Detroit: A total of 3 people were arrested at this checkpoint, is that correct?
Police Sergeant: Yes there were. That’s how many we typically get at a checkpoint like this.
DUI attorney in Detroit: What do you mean by a checkpoint like this?
Police Sergeant: A checkpoint to find drunk drivers.
DUI attorney in Detroit: So are you saying that was the purpose of this checkpoint? To find and prosecute drunk drivers?
Police Sergeant: Absolutely.
Here the DUI attorney in Detroit is able to successfully demonstrate through the use of cross-examination that the officer being questioned was on the “progommatic level” (that is that he planned, supervised, and carried out the checkpoint) and that the sole purpose of the checkpoint was to find and arrest drunk drivers. Under City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, the DUI checkpoint used in this case would be unconstitutional.
Contact Us
If you have been charged with a DUI after being stopped at a police checkpoint, call the Law Offices of Christopher Trainor & Associates to discuss your case with one of our DUI lawyers in Detroit. Call our office at 800-961-8477 to schedule an initial consultation.
When police officers detain a driver on suspicion of DUI, they usually test his or her blood alcohol content (BAC) or administer a field sobriety test to determine whether to press charges. Yet, even motorists charged with DUI due to high BAC results can work with a Michigan DUI lawyer to argue that their BAC was below the legal limit while operating the vehicle.
A Michigan DUI Attorney explains BAC
Blood alcohol content, or blood alcohol concentration, is the percentage of alcohol in a person's blood. Although not all drivers are familiar the complexities of BAC, Michigan DUI lawyers know that a person's blood alcohol content increases and decreases in stages over time.
Potential Defense Arguments
A Michigan DUI lawyer may argue that a defendant began driving immediately after consuming an alcoholic beverage and therefore had not reached the first BAC stage when he or she was operating the vehicle. By this argument, the defendant's blood alcohol content could have been below the legal BAC threshold while driving but above the legal threshold when breathalyzed by law enforcement agents.
Limits to This Type of Defense
A defendant's Michigan DUI attorneys will not initiate this defense if is not believable and supported by additional evidence. For instance, jurors will most likely not believe that a defendant's BAC measured below the legal threshold if his or her breathalyzer results were above the threshold and he or she performed poorly on several field sobriety assessments.
In addition, Michigan DUI lawyers may be limited to utilizing this tactic only in certain geographical areas as some districts enforce stricter BAC laws.
You Don't Have to Be Convicted for DUI
If you have been charged with DUI because of your recorded blood alcohol content, a Michigan DUI lawyer could fight your charges. Don't wait another day to contact the Law Offices of Christopher Trainor & Associates at (800) 961-8477.
Your Michigan DUI defense attorney will need to obtain information from you regarding your arrest. However, he or she may start by asking you to describe your overall state of health at the time of the arrest. Here are some questions you'll need to be ready to answer in that regard:
If you need help, call Michigan DUI defense attorney Chris Trainor for a free evaluation of your case.
