DUI Checkpoint Laws by State

Driving while intoxicated (DWI) and driving under the influence (DUI) are dangerous crimes. For years, states have grappled with how to reduce drugged and drunk drivers. In addition to strengthening DUI laws, many states use sobriety checkpoints. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that states that use DUI checkpoints have seen a significant drop in intoxication-related accidents and fatalities. Some data shows decreased DUIs and related incidents the week following a sobriety checkpoint.

What Is a Sobriety Checkpoint?

A sobriety checkpoint, or DUI checkpoint, is a predetermined location where law enforcement officers set up a roadblock to screen drivers for signs of impairment. DUI checkpoints ensure that the public is safe from motorists driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI).

If the police officer suspects intoxicated driving, they conduct field sobriety tests and chemical tests. These include a Breathalyzer, breath test, urine, or blood tests. Chemical tests determine if your blood alcohol content (BAC) is over the legal limit or you are under the influence of other intoxicants. A positive chemical test is probable cause for a DUI arrest. You have the right to refuse these tests, but there are usually immediate consequences for not cooperating.

DUI checkpoints and roadblocks are different from saturation patrols. Saturation patrols are when police departments increase the number of police vehicles patrolling the streets. These often occur when more people might be drinking, like on holiday weekends.

Law enforcement agencies usually must give notice before employing sobriety checkpoints. You may choose to avoid that area or take extra precautions. If you decide to make a U-turn or otherwise evade the checkpoint, you risk catching police attention.

Are DUI Checkpoints Legal?

Sobriety checkpoints are controversial. Police officers must have a reasonable suspicion that a driver has broken traffic laws before making a traffic stop. A DUI checkpoint stop is different. Law enforcement agencies screen all or most vehicles passing through the checkpoint for intoxicated or drunk driving. They must use neutral methods to decide screening criteria, such as every fourth motor vehicle. They may not use profiling, such as by ethnicity, age, or make and model of the car.

Michigan established a pilot program for sobriety checkpoints in 1986 but faced a lawsuit. The case made it to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the case Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the Supreme Court said that sobriety checkpoints did not violate the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court ruled that sobriety checkpoints were brief enough not to be overly intrusive. Also, states have a great interest in protecting their citizens from intoxicated drivers. The use of DUI checkpoints is a reasonable tool to use in reaching this goal.

State DUI Checkpoint Laws

Each state can determine the legality of checkpoints used to locate intoxicated motorists. Now, 12 states either prohibit DUI roadblocks or do not use them. The remaining 38 states and the District of Columbia allow sobriety checkpoints.

Some states prohibit DUI checkpoints by state law. They may also interpret the U.S. Constitution through case law to block the use of checkpoints. Several do not allow them through their state constitutions. For instance, Texas prohibits checkpoints based on its interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and constitutional rights. Interestingly, though a Michigan case prompted the Supreme Court's ruling that sobriety checkpoints are legal, Michigan ultimately decided its state constitution prohibits their use.

The frequency of these checkpoints can vary by the time of year. They are set up more often around specific events, like holidays or major sporting events. Typically, states allowing checkpoints require publication of the details of the DUI checkpoint beforehand.

The following chart details DUI checkpoint laws by state.

State

Checkpoints?

Legality

Frequency

Code Section/Case Law

Alabama

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Throughout the year

Case law: Smith v. State, 515 So. 2d 149, 150, 151 (Ala. Crim. App. 1987)

Alaska

Not Used

None

N/A

No statutory authority for use

Arizona

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Can be at least once a month

Case law: State v. Superior Court, 143 Ariz. 45, 691 P.2d 1073 (1984)

Arkansas

Yes

Under state and U.S. Constitutions

Can be weekly

Case law: Brouhard v. Lee, 125 F.3d 656 (8th Cir. 1997)

California

Yes

By statute; state and U.S. Constitutions

Over 2,500 annually

Statute: CA Vehicle Code 2814.2; case law: Ingersoll v. Palmer, 743 P.2d 1299 (Cal. 1987)

Colorado

Yes

Under state and U.S. Constitutions

One to two times a month; see Colorado DUI Checkpoint Manual

Case law: People v. Rister, 803 P.2d 483 (Col. 1990)

Connecticut

Yes

Under state constitution

N/A

Case law: Connecticut v. Boisvert (40 Conn. App. 420 (1996); State v. Mikolinski, 775 A.2d 274 (Conn. 2001)

Delaware

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Conducted monthly January to June; weekly July through December

Case law: Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979)

District of Columbia

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

One to two times a month

Case law: Galberth v. U.S., 590 A.2d 990 (D.C. App. 1991); U.S. v. McFayden, 865 F.2d 1306 (D.C. Cir. 1989)

Florida

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Multiple times per month

Case law: State v. Jones, 483 So. 2d 433 (1986); Campbell v. State, 679 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 1996)

Georgia

Yes

Under state and U.S. Constitutions

Weekly

Case law: State v. Golden, 318 S.E.2d 693 (Ga. App. 1984); Evans v. State, 380 S.E.2d 332 (Ga. App. 1989); Seagraves v. State, 442 S.E.2d 312 (Ga. App. 1994); Hooten v. State, 442 S.E.2d 836 (Ga. App. 1994); Burns v. State, 454 S.E.2d 152 (Ga. App. 1995); Brent v. State, 510 S.E.2d 14 (Ga. 1998)

Hawaii

Yes

By statute

Weekly

Statute: HI. Rev. Stat. § 291E-19 and §291E-20

Idaho

No

N/A

N/A

Case law: State v. Henderson, 756 P.2d 1057 (Idaho 1988)

Illinois

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Once or twice per month per county

Case law: People v. Bartley, 486 N.E.2d 880 (Ill. 1985)

Indiana

Yes

Under state constitution

Only occasionally conducted

Case law: Indiana v. Gerschoffer, 763 N.E.2d 960 (Ind. 2002)

Iowa

No

N/A

N/A

IA. Code Ann. §321K.1 does not allow sobriety checkpoints

Kansas

Yes

Under state law and U.S. Constitution

One to two a month

Case law: State v. Deskins, 673 P. 2d 1174 (Kansas 1983)

Kentucky

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Weekly

Case law: Kinslow v. Commonwealth, 660 S.W.2d. 677 (Ky. 1984); See also Commonwealth of Kentucky Traffic Safety Checkpoint Guide

Louisiana

Yes

Under state constitution

Varies; more often during holidays and events

Case law: State v. Jackson, 764 So.2d 64 (La. 2000)

Maine

Yes

Under U.S. constitution

More frequent in the summer

Case law: State v. Leighton, 551 A.2d 116 (Me. 1988); State v. McMahon, 557 A.2d 1324 (Me. 1989); State v. Babcock, 559 A.2d 337 (Me. 1989)

Maryland

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Weekly

Case law: Little v. State, 479 A.2d 903 (Md. 1984)

Massachusetts

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Throughout the year

Case law: Commonwealth v. Shields, 521 N.E.2d 987 (Mass. 1988); Commonwealth v. Cameron, 545 N.E.2d 619 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989)

Michigan

No

Prohibited under the state constitution

N/A

Case law: Sitz v. Mich. Dept. of State Police, 506 N.W.2d 209 (Mich. 1993)

Minnesota

No

N/A

N/A

Ascher v. Comm. of Public Safety, 519 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1994); Gray v. Comm. of Public Safety, 519 N.W.2d 187 (Minn. 1994)

Mississippi

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Weekly

Case law: Miller v. State, 373 So.2d 1004 (Miss. 1979)

Missouri

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Rarely; unfunded by the state

Case law: State v. Welch, 755 S.W.2d 624 (Mo. App. 1988)

Montana

No, but alternate methods used

By statute, safety check roadblocks are possible

N/A

Statute: Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-502

Nebraska

Yes

Under state law

Multiple times per month

Case law: State v. McCleery, 560 N.W.2d 789 (Neb. 1997)

Nevada

Yes

By statute

Multiple times per month

Statute: Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 484B.570

New Hampshire

Yes, only with judicial approval

By statute

Weekly

Statute: N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 265:1-a

New Jersey

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Several times a month

Case law: State v. Mazurek, 567 A.2d 277 (N.J. Super. A.D. 1989)

New Mexico

Yes

Under state and federal constitutions

Multiple times a month; more often during the summer and around events or holidays

Case law: City of Las Cruces v. Betancourt, 735 P.2d 1161 (N.M. App. 1987); State v. Bates, 902 P.2d 1060 (N.M. App. 1995); State v. Madalena, 908 P.2d 756 (N.M. App. 1995)

New York

Yes

Under U.S. Constitution

Weekly; more frequent on weekends and holidays

Case law: People v. Scott, 473 N.E.2d 1 (N.Y. 1984)

North Carolina

Yes

By statute

Weekly

Statute: N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-16.3A

North Dakota

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

More often during holiday weekends or events

Case law: City of Bismark v. Uhden, 513 N.W.2d 373 (N.D. 1994).

Ohio

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Throughout the year

Case law: State v. Bauer, 651 N.E. 2d 46 (Ohio App. 10 Dist. 1994)

Oklahoma

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

One to two times monthly

Case law: Geopfert v. State Ex Re. DPS, 884 P.2d 1218 (Okla. App. 1994)

Oregon

No, illegal under state constitution

N/A

N/A

Case law: State v. Boyanovsky, 743 P.2d 711 (Or. 1987)

Pennsylvania

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Throughout the year; more often during holiday weekends or events

Case law: Commonwealth v. Yastrop, 768 A.2d 318 (Pa. 2001)

Rhode Island

No, illegal under state constitution

N/A

N/A

Case law: Primental v. Rhode Island, 561 A.2d 1348 (R.I. 1989)

South Carolina

Yes, with judicial approval

U.S. Constitution; No state statute or case law

N/A

No state authority, but legal

South Dakota

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Monthly

Case law: State v. Claussen, 522 N.W.2d 196 (S.C. 1994)

Tennessee

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Multiple times per month

Case law: State v. Downey, 945 S.W.2d 102 (Tenn. 1997)

Texas

No

Illegal under Texas' interpretation of U.S. Constitution

N/A

Case law: State v. Holt, 887 S.W. 2d 16 (Tex. Cr. App. 1994)

Utah

Yes. with magistrate's approval

By statute

More often during the summer, over holidays

Statute: Utah Code Ann. § 77-23-101 et seq

Vermont

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Weekly

Case law: State v. Martin, 496 A.2d 442 (Vt. 1985); State v. Record, 548 A.2d 422 (Vt. 1988)

Virginia

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Occasionally

Case law: Lowe v. Commonwealth, 337 S.E.2d 273 (Va. 1985)

Washington

No, illegal under state constitution

N/A

N/A

Case law: City of Seattle v. Mesiani, 755 P.2d 775 (Wash. 1988)

West Virginia

Yes

Under state and U.S. constitutions

Multiple times per month

Case law: Carte v. Cline, 460 S.E.2d 48 (W.Va. 1995)

Wisconsin

No, prohibited by state statute

N/A

N/A

Statute: Wis. Stat. Ann. § 349.02(2)(a)

Wyoming

No

N/A

N/A

Statute: Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-17-101 et seq.

 

Learn more About DUI Checkpoint Laws from a DUI Defense Attorney

A DUI conviction carries severe penalties. You can lose your driver's license, pay hefty fines, and serve jail time. If you are facing DUI charges due to a sobriety checkpoint, it's a good idea to talk to a local DUI attorney. Finding a qualified criminal defense lawyer can mean the difference between winning your case and serving a harsh DUI sentence.

Was this helpful?

Can I Solve This on My Own or Do I Need an Attorney?

  • Complex DUI situations usually require a lawyer
  • DUI defense attorneys can challenge Breathalyzer/Intoxilyzer or blood test results
  • A lawyer can seek to reduce or eliminate DUI penalties
  • A lawyer can help get your license back

Get tailored advice and ask your legal questions. Many attorneys offer free consultations.

 

 If you need an attorney, find one right now.