skip navigation


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: 92414 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Curbing the Drunk Driver Under the Fourth Amendment - The Constitutionality of Roadblock Seizures
Journal: Georgetown Law Journal  Volume:71  Dated:(1983)  Pages:1457-1486
Author(s): R A Ifft
Date Published: 1983
Page Count: 30
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
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This examination of the constitutionality of driving-while-intoxicated (DWI) roadblock investigations concludes that such roadblocks may be constitutional under the fourth amendment if both the subjective intrusiveness of the stop and police discretion are carefully limited.
Abstract: The study first describes the basic features of DWI roadblocks as they are currently conducted throughout the country, and then examines the major Supreme Court cases that comprise the law of roadblock search and seizure. Drawing from these cases, the note demonstrates that courts should sanction the conduct of certain roadblock stops initiated without individualized suspicion because of the lessened subjective intrusion and the limited discretion of field officers present in the conduct of these roadblocks. Several lower Federal and State court decisions since 'Prouse' are critiqued, and it is argued that the courts should consider the limitation of police discretion, not as an end in itself, but in relation to subjective intrusiveness. The note also discusses how a warrant requirement and the physical features of the DWI roadblock may limit subjective intrusiveness. Finally, it is argued that the most intrusive aspects of the DWI roadblock investigation must be justified on an individualized basis. A total of 22 footnotes are provided. (Author summary modified)
Index Term(s): Driving Under the Influence (DUI); Right of privacy; Roadblocks; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*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.