skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 136686 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Drunk-Driving Roadblocks Under State Constitutions: A Reasonable Alternative to Michigan v. Sitz
Journal: Criminal Law Bulletin  Volume:28  Issue:3  Dated:(May-June 1992)  Pages:195-217
Author(s): T J Hickey; M Axline
Date Published: 1992
Page Count: 23
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article reviews the emergence of State constitutional law as an effective means of extending individual rights; State constitutional provisions that limit the use of drunk-driving roadblocks are used to illustrate the point.
Abstract: State constitutional protections are often substantially broader than those provided by the U.S. Constitution; however, many lawyers continue to ignore this source of individual rights and fail to brief State constitutional issues in appropriate cases. One possible explanation for this failure is that U.S. lawyers, long accustomed to arguing Federal constitutional claims, lack an understanding of the role of State constitutions in the U.S. legal system. The authors review the historical justifications for a State constitutional analysis and suggest a methodology for presenting these claims. This is a 2-step process. The first step involves the development of potential constitutional arguments. The second step consists of a determination of which of these arguments is most likely to be successful in a specific jurisdiction. The authors examine sobriety checkpoint stops to illustrate how State constitutional law can be effectively used to extend the rights of the accused, given the erosion of Federal prohibitions against sobriety checkpoint stops under the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (1990). 131 footnotes
Main Term(s): Driver road check; State constitutions
Index Term(s): Driving Under the Influence (DUI); Roadblocks; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=136686

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.