The sobriety check or roadblock has passed U.S. Supreme Court muster as constitutional. Under the Fourth Amendment we are protected “against unreasonable searches and seizures.” When the good of society is at stake however, the search is no longer deemed unreasonable.
In New Mexico, a sobriety check has to meet eight criteria established by the court of appeals.
- the selection of the site and procedures for conducting it must be made and established by supervisory law enforcement personnel rather than officers in the field. Ideally, roadblock decisions should be made by the chief of police or other high-ranking supervisory officials
- the discretion of field officers be restricted … As nearly as possible, each motorist should be dealt with in precisely the same manner
- the safety of the motoring public and the field officer should also be given proper consideration [minimal traffic congestion]
- the location of the roadblock is significant in determining the degree of intrusiveness and safety of the public and police…Obviously, a location chosen with the actual intent of stopping and searching only a particular group of people, i.e., Hispanics, blacks, etc., would not be tolerated
- time and duration [e.g., late evening, not during morning rush hour]
- the official nature of the roadblock should be immediately apparent. Officers in the field should be uniformed; police cars should be marked; and warning or stop signs, flares and pylons are advisable. The roadblock scene should strike an appropriate balance to provide for high visibility at the roadblock, yet minimize the potential fear and apprehension to
the public - the average length of time that a motorist is detained at the roadblock and the degree of intrusiveness should be minimized
- the deterrence value of any roadblock and its reasonableness for sobriety checks will be enhanced if given widespread advance publicity
City of Las Cruces, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Elizabeth Betancourt, and Henry J. Baca, Defendants-Appellants (1987)
You do have to produce identification and registration. You do not have to answer any questions. One problem with answering questions is that it opens the door to more questions.
Another problem with answering questions. You have a beer at 5 and get stopped at 10. What’s the answer to the question, “Have you had a drink?” Lying to a police officer is not good. Qualifying an answer may be even worse.
The answer many advocates suggest is, “Officer, I prefer not to discuss my personal affairs.” They can’t legally hold you because you chose not to engage in small-talk. And refusing to chit-chat is not probable cause.
And if you think, well I never drink, the officer at the one check point I visited also asked about drugs and (if I remember it correctly) medications. What’s the answer to that question?
[Sobriety checks are unconstitutional under state law in Alaska, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.]