Virginia Court of Appeals Upholds Traffic Checkpoints

September 07, 2012

In spring 2009, the Hanover, Virginia, County Sheriff's Office set up a traffic checkpoint around lunchtime, stopped driver Michael Desposito and asked for his operator's license and registration. He was unable to produce a license, and a Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles' records check showed he was driving the vehicle without a license and as a habitual offender (i.e., someone previously convicted of multiple counts of drunk driving).

In the case against him, Desposito moved to suppress the evidence of the traffic stop, asserting that it was illegal because the officer had too much discretion in organizing the checkpoint. The officer had been told to do it at "lunchtime" and that it must last at least 30 minutes, but he did not receive a direction for a specific end time.

The state trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress and he was convicted of driving after having been declared a habitual offender. He appealed to the Court of Appeals of Virginia. The appeals court agreed with the lower court and upheld the conviction.

Traffic Checkpoints Permissible

The U.S. Supreme Court has found traffic checkpoints or roadblocks to be constitutionally permissible and not in violation of the Fourth Amendment proscription against unreasonable search and seizure as long as law enforcement operates them according to a defined plan, using neutral criteria and without allowing the officers in the field "unbridled discretion."

The Usual Suspects?

A dragnet or checkpoint used for general crime control, where police do not have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime has been committed, are not allowed by the Constitution. Traffic stops for general crime control give individual officers too much discretion in whom they stop and are potentially abusive.

However, the Supreme Court has allowed checkpoint programs designed to reduce the "immediate hazard" posed by drunk and unlicensed drivers on the highways.

To be constitutional, a roadblock must stop all drivers or a truly random sample of drivers, preventing police from engaging in searches that would violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches such as those stemming from racial profiling of drivers.

Court Finds Roadblock Reasonable

In Desposito's case, the Court of Appeals found the officers had to choose from a specific set of locations and the instructions for "lunchtime" meant that the actual operation of the roadblock from 11 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. was reasonable.

The Hanover County Sheriff's Office had a practice of not operating the checkpoints for more than two hours, and the one hour and 45 minutes was close enough to this time limit.

The court found no unreasonable intrusion upon the drivers' personal privacy because there were limits on the locations within Hanover County where the traffic stop could be located, which meant the officers could not target a specific person.

In addition, limiting a roadblock's duration to two hours removed the discretion from the officers operating the roadblock to run a "rolling" roadblock that could be frequently moved, eliminating that potential for abuse.

Anyone facing potential charges after being stopped at a Virginia roadblock should obtain the advice of an experienced criminal defense attorney as early in the process as possible.

Article provided by John J. Rice, Attorney & Counselor at Law
Visit us at www.johnjrice.com