roadblocks this is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4a question is...

8
Roadblocks Roadblocks This is a seizure with little This is a seizure with little or no individualized or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such question is when are such seizures “reasonable?” seizures “reasonable?”

Upload: duane-thomas

Post on 23-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

RoadblocksRoadblocksThis is a seizure with little or no This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”seizures “reasonable?”

Page 2: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

A roadblock of which the purpose is A roadblock of which the purpose is to get drunk drivers off the roads is to get drunk drivers off the roads is constitutionalconstitutional

Michigan v. SitzMichigan v. Sitz (1990) (1990)– Why? Because the state’s interest in Why? Because the state’s interest in

getting drunk drivers off the roads getting drunk drivers off the roads >intrusion on motorists [= balancing >intrusion on motorists [= balancing test]test]Roadblock advances that interestRoadblock advances that interestThe intrusion is brief, limitedThe intrusion is brief, limitedThe roadblock is systematic; does not rely The roadblock is systematic; does not rely

on police discretion about whom to stopon police discretion about whom to stop

Page 3: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

Roadblock for the purpose of Roadblock for the purpose of general crime control is general crime control is unconstitutionalunconstitutional

Indianapolis v. EdmondIndianapolis v. Edmond (2000) (re drug (2000) (re drug interdiction)interdiction)

– Why? Apparently because to investigate Why? Apparently because to investigate whether a particular individual is whether a particular individual is involved in criminal activity requires at involved in criminal activity requires at least least somesome individualized suspicion. individualized suspicion.Remember that stopping a car = fourth Remember that stopping a car = fourth

amendment “seizure”amendment “seizure”– TerryTerry: seizure requires reasonable suspicion: seizure requires reasonable suspicion

Page 4: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

The Mode of Analysis for Roadblock:The Mode of Analysis for Roadblock:– Purpose Analysis andPurpose Analysis and– Balancing TestBalancing Test

Page 5: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

Purpose analysisPurpose analysis

Ordinarily OKOrdinarily OK [Individualized [Individualized

suspicion not required]suspicion not required]

Not OKNot OK

Getting drunk drivers off Getting drunk drivers off the roadthe road

General crime detectionGeneral crime detection

Checking for illegal aliens Checking for illegal aliens at fixed Border Patrol at fixed Border Patrol

checkpointscheckpoints

Drug InterdictionDrug Interdiction

Systematic and total Systematic and total license checkslicense checks

Random stops for Random stops for driver’s license checkdriver’s license check

Page 6: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

Apprehending specific Apprehending specific indicted persons or indicted persons or specific fugitivesspecific fugitives

Checking for illegal Checking for illegal aliens with a roving aliens with a roving border patrol stopborder patrol stop

Checking for kidnapped Checking for kidnapped personperson

Dealing with dangerous Dealing with dangerous or exigent or exigent

circumstancescircumstances

Page 7: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

Balancing TestBalancing Test[from [from Brown v. TexasBrown v. Texas, 1979], 1979]

The purpose for having The purpose for having the roadblock & the the roadblock & the degree to which the degree to which the

seizure advances that seizure advances that purposepurpose

V.V.

The severity The severity of the of the

interference interference with individual with individual

libertyliberty

Page 8: Roadblocks This is a seizure with little or no individualized suspicion; thus, the 4A question is when are such seizures “reasonable?”

Factors to consider in balancingFactors to consider in balancing To assess the severity of the intrusion on To assess the severity of the intrusion on

the individual’s fourth amendment right the individual’s fourth amendment right not to be unreasonably seized, consider:not to be unreasonably seized, consider:– The degree of police discretion about whom to The degree of police discretion about whom to

stop [Stopping everyone versus random]stop [Stopping everyone versus random]– The degree of surprise and “suddenness” of The degree of surprise and “suddenness” of

the roadblock to the motoristthe roadblock to the motorist– Length of delayLength of delay– Clarity of identity of it as a police roadblockClarity of identity of it as a police roadblock– Training and experience of the officersTraining and experience of the officers– Day or nightDay or night– Public safety factorPublic safety factor