Background on DUI Checkpoints
DUI checkpoints, also known as sobriety checkpoints, are temporary roadblocks set up by law enforcement to catch drivers under the influence of drugs or alcohol. They are also a preferred tool for law enforcement agencies hoping to curb the number of impaired drivers on the road and reduce the number of incidents of drunk driving. While they were initially met with some resistance, they have become a common practice in many states, including Arizona.
DUI checkpoints as they exist today have been around since at least 1986, when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz that state and local law enforcement agencies could legally stop vehicles for questioning without probable cause or a warrant. This ruling led to the implementation of many roadblocks demanding driver sobriety in various localities.
The reasoning behind sobriety checkpoints is simple: catching more drunk drivers by making them appear at almost every turn. The goal is to make them a regular part of the streetscape, meaning that drivers are much less likely to be under the influence simply because they know there is an increased risk of being stopped. In the state of Arizona, sobriety checkpoints are usually established during holidays or other times when driving under the influence is likely to be more common , such as St. Patrick’s Day or Christmas.
Checkpoints are often publicized through radio or television, which alerts the public to the possibility of roadblocks in certain areas and helps dissuade drivers from operating their vehicles under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
During most sobriety checkpoints, vehicles are asked to drive past a stop point, where officers will flag down the vehicle to question the driver. The officer may determine either through the driver’s appearance and responses to questions, or by physical evidence in the vehicle, that the driver is under the influence and then take steps to remove them from their vehicle and issue a citation.
Here is where Arizona DUI checkpoints become somewhat unusual. Laws in many other states prevent police from administering sobriety tests at DUI checkpoints, favoring a policy that allows officers to screen every car for signs of impaired driving, but does not require officers to identify every driver who could be drunk. Many law enforcement agencies still conduct sobriety checkpoints, realizing that they might not catch all drivers under the influence, but hoping the percentage of drivers caught under the influence will lead to safer streets.
Arizona’s Position on DUI Checkpoints
While sobriety checkpoints are conducted in many states across the nation, they are not permitted in the majority of states in the West. Arizona is one of the minority of states in the West that permits sobriety checkpoints, albeit, with significantly clarifying regulations on their implementation.
In Arizona, there are no specific laws authorizing or prohibiting the use of sobriety checkpoints. However, the State Supreme Court has long held that sobriety checkpoints are unconstitutional. In 1995, however, the Arizona states’ Alcohol Abuse Committee was commissioned to analyze the issue and held that "well designed sobriety checkpoint programs are an acceptable method of controlling alcohol abuse and reducing the number of arrest-able offenses."
In 1996, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the use of sobriety checkpoints in State Of Arizona v. Harvey, 876 P.2d 651 (Ariz. 1994). The Court held that a properly conducted sobriety checkpoint does not violate either the federal or state constitution. However, limited discretion is given to law enforcement agencies as to the legality of sobriety checkpoints in Arizona. Specifically, the state’s supreme court requires that the sobriety checkpoint program:
Recent developments in Arizona law have affected most directly law enforcement agencies’ authority to establish DUI sobriety checkpoints. In an effort to balance the rights of motorists with law enforcement’s need to address the continuing problem of impaired driving, the legislature approved a bill last month that regulates the operation of sobriety checkpoints, homeimg legislations in How Are DUI Laws Created?.
Specifically, A.R.S. § 28-1564 (B)(2) provides that sobriety checkpoints may be operated as long as they are consistent with the following requirements:
The new law became effective August 10, 2008.
Differences Between Federal and State Laws Regarding DUI Checkpoints
Under federal law, DUI checkpoints are unconstitutional. The United States Supreme Court’s ruling in 1976 in the case of Brown v. Texas makes any DUI checkpoint set up based on the 4th amendment unconstitutional. This case set precedence stating that sobriety checkpoints are considered an unreasonable search and seizure. The ruling specifically cites that sobriety checkpoints are a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Arizona state law also declares DUI checkpoints to be unconstitutional. The Arizona Supreme Court ruling in 2003 in the case of State of Arizona v. Little made it very clear that sobriety checkpoints cannot be constitutional under Arizona law. And the Supreme Court went on to state the following:
Under the Fourth Amendment, a state may not make a general search of its citizens as they come and go from their homes and offices, but may conduct a short investigation when there is a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a particular person is committing a crime. Sobriety checkpoints are more like general searches than like individualized investigations based on reasonable suspicion. If an officer subject to the Fourth Amendment—such as one employed by a state police force—stops a driver without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, that officer would violate the Fourth Amendment and be subject to criminal and civil liability. Our state Constitution appears to adopt this requirement in the context of sobriety checkpoints. Id at 28.
Even though in 2016 the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Birchfield v. North Dakota that sobriety checkpoints are constitutional in certain circumstances, there is no precedence for sobriety checkpoints being legal in Arizona.
Constitutional Issues and Court Opinions Surrounding DUI Checkpoints
In assessing the legality of DUI checkpoints, it is important to examine certain constitutional concerns that have been raised. Historically, the strategy of setting up roadblocks on public highways has been debated from a constitutional perspective. Since the 1980s, U.S. courts have looked at sobriety checkpoints as suspensions of Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable search and seizure.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1990 that sobriety checkpoints were not considered an unreasonable search and seizure if pursued for the public good under specific guidelines that were applied equally to all drivers. In the 1990 ruling, Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, the court held that an intrusion into people’s lives by sobriety checkpoints was worth the public safety benefits they can provide.
The reasoning behind such checkpoints was provided by the court: "[S]obriety checkpoints can reduce drunk driving…and save lives." The court noted how "the risk of harm to each individual stopped at the checkpoint is negligible" and that sobriety checkpoints provided a very minimal intrusion into people’s lives.
A similar ruling came from the Arizona Court of Appeals in 2010, which determined that sobriety checkpoints are legal based on the public safety benefits they provide. The court went on to say that such checkpoints "tolerate an intrusion of only minimal dimensions, and sweeps up only those few individuals stopped."
Since these rulings, the Arizona Supreme Court has looked at certain factors that need to be addressed before sobriety checkpoints are considered legal. These factors include the legal justification for stopping drivers — to combat DUI — the segment of the road that the sobriety checkpoint will cover, and that the road has, at times, been well traveled in the past.
Additionally, the court said that the sobriety checkpoint needs to be well-marked in order to maintain the public’s trust that they are not unlawful roadblocks. They must be in well-lit areas, and drivers should be questioned in a brief and friendly manner. Officers need to be trained then, too.
Altogether, sobriety checkpoints are allowed in Arizona if there is a public safety benefit, given their minimal intrusion into people’s lives. The court has indicated that most of the above mentioned factors need to be addressed before sobriety checkpoints are deemed legal.
How Drivers Can Act During DUI Checkpoint Stops
Stemming from the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which sets the guidelines for illegal search and seizure in cases of driving under the influence, checkpoints are set up in most states, including Arizona. DUI checkpoints are like a preemptive strike on drunk or drugged driving, stopping drivers before committing offenses they might not commit if given the opportunity to go about their daily business. However, DUI checkpoints are controversial, and laws surrounding them are subject to change. Every few years, a new case addressing their use by law enforcement makes it the opinion pages of The Arizona Republic, and from there, courts across the state become far more prudent in their enforcement of unlawful stops.
For example, in 2012, Chandler police halted an August 14 traffic stop due to complaints that officers were being overly aggressive in their questioning of drivers and passengers, which there is no law regarding the scope of DUI checkpoint questioning. When one driver questioned the officer’s authority to stop him in the first place, asking, "Are you just pulling me over because I’m a Mexican or what?", the officer said he had no obligation to answer any questions.
The DUI checkpoint officer allegedly told the unlawful driver he could tell the officer his nationality "only once," per the law of the State of Arizona, and then he asked the driver for his race. The officer continued, "You’re here in America illegally. You have to answer my questions. I don’t have to answer yours." The driver was held at the DUI checkpoint for longer than was necessary to ascertain that he had not committed any crime, and that’s exactly what the law prohibits.
Chances are, you will not be subjected to the same treatment at a DUI checkpoint . DUI checkpoints cannot be set up on the basis of profiling drivers, or stopping drivers because of the race, sex, nationality, age, or other distinguishing characteristic. Additionally, as soon as a driver is determined to be legally sober, he or she can be and should be released. If there is not probable cause to hold the driver and allow the car to continue down the road, the officers are breaking the law.
Although DUI checkpoints have been ruled to be legal by the Arizona Supreme Court, drivers can avoid the checkpoint by a simple and legal act. They merely need to make a left or right turn before the DUI checkpoint. Officers cannot follow drivers or cause them to make illegal turns if they do so in the right direction according to road signs.
And another thing. Although Arizona law does not make it illegal for you to consume 1 ounce of marijuana between 1 and 8 hours before you drive, it is illegal to consume so much that your blood alcohol content is 0.08% or greater, or that you have any amount of marijuana in your bloodstream when you are under the influence of any qualifying drug. In Arizona, zero tolerance laws apply to marijuana: if any amount is found in your system, it is considered the same as a blood alcohol content of 0.08%.
Remember that officers can ask you questions as long as you’re polite and respectful. They cannot order you out of your car unless they genuinely believe it is necessary for their safety, nor can they search your person or your property without your express permission or probable cause. They can ask to see your license, registration, and insurance, and you have to show it to them, but you do not have to answer any further questions. In fact, requesting a lawyer is always the best course of action during a DUI checkpoint stop.
The Effect of DUI Checkpoints on Public Safety
The debate over the efficacy of DUI checkpoints in Arizona centers around their ability to deter drunk driving and protect public safety. Proponents argue that they are an effective tool for reducing alcohol-related incidents on the roads, while critics say that they are ineffective at best, and a violation of civil liberties at worst.
A 2013 study published in the Journal of Criminal Justice found that DUI checkpoints play a significant role in reducing the number of alcohol-related injuries and fatalities. The study analyzed data collected between 1993 and 2008 and found that DUI checkpoints in Arizona, particularly in Tucson and Phoenix, were effective at reducing DUI-involved fatal collisions by approximately 7-9%. Similarly, a 2016 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that, after implementing checkpoints in predictable locations, Arizona experienced a 16% decline in drunk driving crashes, injuries, and deaths.
Some studies have focused on the overall deterrent effect of DUI checkpoints on drink-driving behavior. In 2015, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Review of Experimental Evidence Supporting DUI Checkpoints reported that potential drivers were deterred from drinking around the presence of DUI checkpoints. The study concluded that "DUI checkpoints reduce impaired driving crashes at least in part by deterring impaired driving."
On the flip side, critics point out that the actual number of drivers that are arrested at DUI checkpoints is relatively small, and therefore claim that they are not an effective way to improve safety on Arizona roads. A report produced by the Montgomery County Police Department in Maryland estimated that only approximately 1-2% of the drivers passing through a checkpoint are arrested for DUI. Similar numbers were reported by the Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety, noting that checkpoints did not yield many arrests (the sheriff’s office did not provide the actual number). With such low arrest rates, some officials believe that it is questionable whether checkpoints promote public safety as effectively as other methods, such as random patrols or saturation patrols.
Ultimately, the impact of DUI checkpoints on public safety in Arizona is a mixed bag. While there is evidence that they are effective at reducing DUI-related crashes, injuries, and deaths, there is also evidence to suggest that their deterrent effect on drunk driving may be exaggerated.
The Emerging Controversy of DUI Checkpoints
Opinions regarding DUI checkpoints in Arizona vary among the public and law enforcement. Critics point to the infringement of personal liberty and the potential for abuse of power. They argue that saturating a neighborhood with law enforcement is a strain on public resources and is often unnecessary when combating a crime as preventable as impaired driving. Some also argue that, because they are not viewed as effective in scooping up a large number of impaired drivers, checkpoints place an unfair burden on those in the community who do not commit any violation while driving. In other words, it is said to result in the wrongful detainment of individuals who are actually doing nothing wrong. Opponents also point out a high rate of failed sobriety tests that do not result in charges.
Supporters, however, see that, while DUI checkpoints may not be effective in arresting a large number of impaired drivers, they do serve as an excellent deterrent to those who might consider driving after drinking. The mere knowledge that law enforcement is looking for impaired drivers has been shown to reduce the risk of drinking and driving by anywhere from 20-50 percent. It is also argued that checkpoints serve as a way of deterring other types of criminal activity. Finally , supporters of DUI checkpoints cite various studies showing that they do in fact reduce the number of drunk drivers on the road and, as a result, help to contribute to a reduction in the number of DUI-related injuries and fatalities.
The Arizona Highway Patrol has stated that it views sobriety checkpoints as important tools for enhancing traffic safety. Citing that Arizona has one of the highest rates of impaired driving in the entire county of Arizona, the department lauds them as effective in "apprehending drunk drivers and getting them off the road," citing statistics from 2015 that showed at least 82 such arrests were made during the 41 checkpoints the department held that year. For the same year, the Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety admitted that while it could find no evidence of drunk driving caused by checkpoint locations or proximity, there is evidence of impaired driving prevention caused by checkpoints.