 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Wuerslin10/30/2002
ng operations to DUI roadblocks, arguing that carefully circumscribed, objective guidelines are needed to prevent abuse. See State v. Record, 150 Vt. 84, 88, 548 A.2d 422, 425 (1988). Legal concerns about random vehicle stops, however, arise because such stops must be reconciled with constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure protected by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article Eleven of the Vermont Constitution. Id. at 85, 548 A.2d at 423. The undercover sting operations being conducted by the DLC do not involve a "search or seizure" of the bartenders or their property; the investigations require the bartenders merely to perform their job, i.e., check identification and serve alcohol. Moreover, assuming for argument that there was a Fourth Amendment right at stake, rule making under VAPA would not be the remedy. In Record, we did not require police to engage in formal rule making to legitimate the establishment of roadblocks. We held that to protect the public's constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, roadblocks are permissible only when police follow a detailed set of standards ensuring stops are not unduly intrusive and drivers are not singled out arbitrarily. Id. at 90, 548 A.2d at 426. Having DLC inspectors among the customers at a bar is not disruptive to the routine of a bartender. Because DLC monitoring does not involve the detention or search of bartenders, no written guidelines are necessary to legitimate the DLC's undercover operations to enforce prohibitions on furnishing alcohol to minors.
Because we find that the DLC was not obliged to promulgate administrative regulations under the VAPA detailing how it would enforce the furnishing statute, we do not reach the question of whether, if formal rule making were required, the agency's failure to promulgate formal rules would require the dismissal of the charge against appellant.
Affirmed.
BY THE COURT:
Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Chief Justice
John A. Dooley, Associate Justice
James L. Morse, Associate Justice
Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice
Marilyn S. Skoglund, Associate Justice
|