THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT SAID:
NO

The Supreme Court stated that:

 We have also upheld brief, suspicionless seizures of motorists at a fixed Border Patrol checkpoint designed to intercept illegal aliens... at a sobriety checkpoint aimed at removing drunk drivers from the 
road... we suggested that a similar type of roadblock with the purpose of verifying drivers' licenses and vehicle registrations would be permissible.  In none of these cases, however, did we indicate approval of a checkpoint program whose primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing...

We have never approved a checkpoint program whose primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing.  Rather, our checkpoint cases have recognized only limited exceptions to the general rule that a seizure must be accompanied by some measure of individualized suspicion...

Consistent with this suggestion, each of the checkpoint programs that we have approved was designed primarily to serve purposes closely related to the problems of policing the border or the necessity of ensuring roadway safety.

Because the primary purpose of the... narcotics checkpoint program is to uncover evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing, the program contravenes the Fourth Amendment.

The United States Supreme Court published its decision on December 21, 2000 as City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, No. 99-1030 (2000)



This Page Sponsored By

Victor VeVea
Author - Paralegal - Expert
www.VictorVeVea.com


Copyright © 2000, Law Offices of George A. Boyle