 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Abell5/9/2003
INTRODUCTION
In this case, the defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during an administrative vehicle checkpoint detention. Based on our ruling in State v. Debooy, 2000 UT 32, 996 P.2d 546, the defendant argues that this checkpoint was unconstitutional under article I, section 14 of the Utah Constitution. We agree and reverse the denial of his motion to suppress.
BACKGROUND
On February 29, 2000, Judge Kent Nielsen approved the Utah Highway Patrol's ("UHP") application to conduct an administrative highway checkpoint the following day between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., on Interstate 70, about four miles west of Salina, Utah. The application was submitted pursuant to Utah Code Ann. section 77-23-104 (1999), which requires judicial approval of a written plan prior to the operation of a checkpoint. Under section 77-23-104, the plan must include several details relating to the operation of the checkpoint, including the purpose for establishing the checkpoint. Utah Code Ann. § 77-23-104 (2)(a)(iv). The checkpoint plan authorized eleven independent checks among seven stated purposes:
A. To promote a safe public environment for all persons using the state highways.
B. To inspect compliance with seat belt and child restraint requirements.
C. To determine if drivers are impaired.
D. To detect minors having in their possession alcohol or controlled substances.
E. To conduct exterior examination of vehicles for the required lights, turn signals, and other exterior required safety devices.
F. To conduct routine level three inspections of commercial vehicles over 26,001 pounds GVW.
G. To inspect the validity of license plates, registration certificates, proof of insurance and driver licenses. See Application and Authorization for Administration Traffic Checkpoint, IV.
While the application authorized multiple checks, the portion of the checkpoint plan providing instructions to officers conducting the checkpoint indicated that this was a "driver license and registration check":
This administrative checkpoint is a driver license and registration check and is to detect and apprehend individuals suspected of violating the following regularly enforced state laws: driver license violations; registration violations; proof of insurance violations; equipment violations; safety inspection violations; alcohol and DUI violations. Id. at VII(H).
The instructions also briefly mentioned how officers would conduct their inquiries at this driver license checkpoint:
Officers will be instructed to request a drivers license, state vehicle registration certificate and valid proof of insurance. Officers will be directed to make a cursory walk around the vehicle inspecting for plain view evidence of the above listed violations. Id.
Under the section of the application dealing with the sequence of traffic to be stopped, the application stated that the inspection and inquiry of non-commercial vehicles were
"estimated to require approximately 30 seconds duration." Id. at III. Inspections of commercial vehicles were estimated to last approximately a minute and a half. Id. These time constraints were not listed among the instructions provided to the officers in the application, however. Rather, the instructions section of the checkpoint plan indicated "citizens will not be delayed longer than is reasonable" to check for all of the violations.
Some details concerning the organization of the checkpoint staging area were also included in the checkpoint plan. Id. Large diamond-shaped
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Utah DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|