KS: DUI roadblock was valid; 1.6% effective rate sufficient

The DUI roadblock in this case satisfied the state supreme court’s standards, and the fact only 1.6% of the persons stopped resulted in arrest is a reasonable effective rate like in Sitz. City of Overland Park v. Rhodes, 46 Kan. App. 2d 57, 257 P.3d 864 (2011)*:

“Numerous conditions and factors must be considered in determining whether a DUI roadblock meets the balancing test in favor of the [State]. Among the factors which should be considered are: (1) The degree of discretion, if any, left to the officer in the field; (2) the location designated for the roadblock; (3) the time and duration of the roadblock; (4) standards set by superior officers; (5) advance notice to the public at large; (6) advance warning to the individual approaching motorist; (7) maintenance of safety conditions; (8) degree of fear or anxiety generated by the mode of operation; (9) average length of time each motorist is detained; (10) physical factors surrounding the location, type and method of operation; (11) the availability of less intrusive methods for combating the problem; (12) the degree of effectiveness of the procedure; and (13) any other relevant circumstances which might bear upon the test. Not all of the factors need to be favorable to the State but all which are applicable to a given roadblock should be considered.”

Defendant’s wheel touching the yellow line three times was justification for a stop. Defendant was arrested and convicted for DUI. State v. Brewer, 2011 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 511 (July 7, 2011).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.