\u201cIn sum, the record establishes that the checkpoint at which Mink was stopped was not implemented in an unreasonable fashion under the Fourth Amendment. Instead, the checkpoint \u2018was clearly aimed at reducing the immediate hazard posed by the presence of drunk drivers on the highways, and there was an obvious connection between the imperative of highway safety and the law enforcement practice at issue.\u2019 Edmond, 531 U.S. at 39 (citing Sitz, 496 U.S. at 447-48). Thus, the undersigned recommends that Judge Wier deny Mink’s motion to suppress. See id. at 48 (affirming \u2018the ability of police officers to act appropriately upon information that they properly learn during a checkpoint stop justified by a lawful primary purpose, even where such action may result in the arrest of a motorist for an offense unrelated to that purpose\u2019).\u201d United States v. Mink, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37751 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 15, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cIn sum, the record establishes that the checkpoint at which Mink was stopped was not implemented in an unreasonable fashion under the Fourth Amendment. Instead, the checkpoint \u2018was clearly aimed at reducing the immediate hazard posed by the presence of … Continue reading