Minnesota should use sobriety checkpoints, Mothers Against Drunk Driving says

In 2012, more than one-quarter of fatal traffic accidents in Minnesota were alcohol-related, according to the state’s Department of Public Safety. Mothers Against Drunk Driving rated the state poorly in terms of having countermeasures in place in order to reduce drunk driving, despite the fact that there were 5,000 fewer DUI arrests last year than the year before. The group suggests that the state should start utilizing checkpoints to nab intoxicated drivers.

Violating basic rights

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects U.S. citizens from unreasonable searches and invasions of privacy. According to the Governors Highway Safety Administration, 12 states, including Minnesota, do not allow sobriety checkpoints, citing that they violate either the federal or state constitution. In essence, these states contend that checkpoints permit law enforcement to investigate drivers without any indication that there has been wrongdoing.

Under ordinary circumstances, law enforcement officers are not permitted to pull over vehicles without a good reason: speeding, driving erratically, failing to stop at a light or for equipment concerns like a missing taillight. However, a checkpoint permits officers to bypass this rule, raising concern that such a loophole could open the way to other types of searches without the need for cause or a warrant.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a split decision regarding roadblocks in Michigan that the checkpoints are necessary to reduce drunk driving, even though they violate a basic constitutional right. As one dissenting justice pointed out, however, it is not prudent to limit individual rights for checkpoints that research shows may only have a small effect on overall traffic safety. Clearly, several states agree with the dissenting opinion that checkpoints are a violation of individual liberty.

Permitting the practice

In the many states that do permit checkpoints, law enforcement must abide by guidelines that the U.S. Supreme Court developed. Those guidelines mandate that the date and location of the checkpoint must be announced. Additionally, law enforcement must have a good reason for holding the checkpoint, such as an increase in drunk driving in a particular area. Lastly, there must be a set plan in place for determining which cars will be pulled over, such as every other car or every third car. Some states have developed exceptions to these guidelines, providing a more lax environment.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

Confidential informants may provide integral information to help build criminal investigations, but how reliable is that information when they are receiving payment for their services? To protect them, state law requires the identity of informants be kept confidential. For those facing criminal charges, however, this creates challenges in questioning the accuracy and validity of the information given at trial.
Stay calm and compose after getting accused of a crime but not charged in Minneapolis, MN. Do not discuss the facts of your case with anyone, including your relatives and family members. Hire a criminal defense attorney with a demonstrated record of winning cases like yours. Your attorney will discuss your rights, guide you on how to cooperate with law enforcement within the legal boundaries, and build a solid defense strategy to fight the charges you could face in the future.
Expungement and sealing of records in Minnesota affect how your criminal history appears to government agencies and the public. The main difference between the two legal actions is that expungement permanently removes past arrests, criminal charges, or convictions from private and public databases, while sealing hides the criminal record from the public. Courts, government entities, and law enforcement agencies can access sealed criminal records.