Local DUI Checkpoints
Text Message & Email Location Alerts
Enfield DUI checkpoint Friday night
ENFIELD, Conn. (WWLP) – The Enfield Police Department will be conducting a DUI checkpoint on Friday, April 23.
According to a news release sent to 22News, the checkpoint will be held on Route 190
(Hazard Avenue) from 7:00 p.m. until approximately midnight. Drivers should be aware of slowed and stopped traffic in the area.
Connecticut is moving forward with returning to a post-pandemic normal. On May 1, most of the state’s COVID-19 business restrictions are lifting. Changes on May 1st include, the restaurant curfew moving from 11:00 p.m. to midnight and some outdoor restrictions are also lifting. Alcohol can be served without having to order food and table capacity limits are going away.
Copyright 2021 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Only on WWLP.com | Digital First
DUI Roadblock Information and Connecticut General Statutes
If you are looking for DUI roadblock information, it can be found here.
a. Law – Connecticut’s controlling case, State of Connecticut v. Mikolinski, 256 Conn. 543 (2001), was decided on a police checkpoint that was implemented “almost to the letter” of the operational plan. All checkpoint stops must occur within the time frame stated by the police department executing the checkpoint unless a supplemental case report is executed as to what the change is and why it was needed. There are required guidelines with respect to operations, site selection and publicity.
b. Sample Motion to Suppress
DOCKET NO. MV00-00000 : SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF CONNECTICUT : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD
VS. : AT G.A. 14 HARTFORD
DEFENDANT : DATE
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS TEST RESULTS AND ALL OTHER
EVIDENCE OBTAINED AFTER INITIAL STOP OF DEFENDANT’S VEHICLE
ON THE GROUNDS THAT ROADBLOCK PROCEDURES USED BY THE
POLICE WERE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Defendant moves this Court enter an order suppressing all chemical test results and all other evidence obtained from Defendant after the initial stop at a sobriety checkpoint conducted by Hartford Police Department on the grounds that the detention, search, seizure, and arrest of Defendant were (1) in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and (2) in violation of Article I, Sections 7, 8, and 9 of the Connecticut Constitution.In addition, as referenced in the attached exhibit “Sobriety Check-Point Hartford Police Operations Plan,” which the State has disclosed to the Defense after a discovery motion was filed, Section IV states, “The checkpoint will be terminated no later than 0330 hours on 4/21/2006.” It should be noted that the Defendant was stopped at this checkpoint on April 22, 2006, which is the day following the last day the checkpoint was authorized. Because of this, the stop was illegal and all evidence obtained should be suppressed.As a result of the sobriety checkpoint procedures implemented by Hartford Police Department on April 22, 2007, Defendant’s vehicle was stopped at the intersection of High Street and Main Avenue. Defendant was asked to roll down the window of the vehicle and was then asked several questions, including Defendant’s name, address, whether Defendant had smoked marijuana that night. As a result of that questioning, Defendant was asked to step from the vehicle, perform a variety of coordination or field sobriety tests and then submit to two urine samples. Defendant performed the field sobriety tests as requested by the police and later submitted to the urine tests, the results of which indicated a presence of THC Metabolite. There was no probable cause initially to stop the defendant’s vehicle and the sole reason the vehicle was stopped was pursuant to a roadblock which was designed and instituted to protect drivers under the influence of alcohol. Because the State failed to set forth sufficient guidelines, standards and protocols for conducting the roadblock, and because the State failed to eliminate unnecessary discretion on the part of the investigating officers in conducting the roadblock, Defendant requests that this Court hold the roadblock procedures to be unconstitutional and to suppress the results of all urine test results, as well as any other evidence obtained from the Defendant. Pimental v. Rhode Island Dept. of Transp., 561 A.2d 1348 (R.I. 1989).Like Rhode Island, Connecticut has similar restrictions on roadblocks. In State v. Mikolinski, 256 Conn. 543 (2001), the Court held the checkpoint plan must embody neutral criteria so as to restrict the officers’ discretion as to which cars to stop and all drivers are to be treated uniformly during the initial stop. The checkpoint must also be implemented “almost to the letter” of the operational plan. The plan relied upon in Mikolinski stated exact dates and times the plan would be executed. Here, because the Defendant was stopped at the checkpoint by the Hartford Police Department after the checkpoint end date and time the plan is unconstitutional and all evidence should be suppressed. WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, Defendant requests that this Court enter an Order suppressing all chemical test results and all other evidence obtained from Defendant following the initial stop on the grounds that Defendant’s detention, search, seizure and arrest were in violation of the federal and state constitutional guarantees protecting a motorist’s reasonable expectation of privacy and security against arbitrary intrusions.
THE DEFENDANT, BY________________________,
Ruane, Attorneys at Law
1 Enterprise Drive, Suite 305
Shelton, CT 06484
Sobriety Checkpoints in Connecticut - Rules and Obligations
The U.S. Constitution protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures, but although a motor vehicle stop is a form of seizure, it is not fully protected by the Fourth Amendment. In Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the U.S. Supreme Court held that sobriety checkpoints, under appropriate conditions, do not violate the Fourth Amendment.
In writing for the majority of the Court, Chief Justice William Rehnquist acknowledged that sobriety checkpoints infringe on a person's constitutional rights, but that the State of Michigan had a substantial governmental interest in reducing the incidents of drunken driving.
To decide the underlying case, the trial court performed a balancing test derived from the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Brown v. Texas (1979). The test involved balancing the state's interest in preventing accidents caused by drunk drivers, the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints in achieving that goal, and the level of intrusion on an individual's privacy caused by the checkpoints.
The Sitz decision stressed the importance of reasonable and appropriate guidelines governing checkpoint operations, site selection and publicizing their utilization.
In Connecticut v. Boisvert (1996), the Connecticut Appellate Court held that roadside sobriety checkpoints do not violate the Connecticut Constitution's provision protecting people against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Connecticut Supreme Court declined to review the Appellate Court's decision, making Boisvert the controlling law in Connecticut as it relates to sobriety checkpoints.
In upholding the constitutionally of sobriety checkpoints, both the U.S. Supreme Court and Connecticut's Appellate Court stated these stops had to be performed in a reasonable manner. In judging what is reasonable, courts generally look to such factors as the length and nature of the stop, the neutral criteria utilized to conduct the stop (no persons were arbitrarily singled out for detention and/or investigation), and whether established, reasonable procedures were followed.
The Connecticut State Policy Administration and Operations Manual provides guidelines for undertaking sobriety checkpoints on state highways. In order for a checkpoint to be reasonable, officers must follow the manual's guidelines requiring notice of the operation be provided to the media at least three days in advance and officers asking all detained drivers the same initial questions.
Additionally, the chosen location must have a history of traffic violations and accidents, should be a road traveled by potential violators, and be clearly visible and marked by the police. Further, police officers must use a neutral formula for stopping drivers, such as every 8th vehicle. Random stops would not be constitutionally permissible, while well conceived and properly executed checkpoints would be acceptable.
If a court finds a checkpoint substantially conformed to the guidelines, but was technically deficient (e.g., the news release notifying the public of the sobriety checkpoint failed to mention the planned date and time), the court could still find the roadblock constitutionally permissible.
The most prudent course of action is to avoid drinking and driving so as to obviate the need for expending considerable sums of money defending yourself against these charges, and to reduce the incidents of serious injury and death caused by drunk drivers.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:Richard P. Hastings
Richard P. Hastings is a personal injury lawyer with the office of Hastings, Cohan & Walsh, LLP, in Ridgefield, CT. He is the author of the books: "The Crash Course on Child Injury Claims" and "The Crash Course On Personal Injury Claims in Connecticut."
Copyright Hastings, Cohan and Walsh, LLP
Disclaimer: Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication at the time it was written. It is not intended to provide legal advice or suggest a guaranteed outcome as individual situations will differ and the law may have changed since publication. Readers considering legal action should consult with an experienced lawyer to understand current laws and.how they may affect a case. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
Dui checkpoints connecticut
CT State Police release holiday DUI checkpoints, roving patrols
In preparation of this, troopers will be out in full force to ensure travel is safe for all with roving patrols and DUI checkpoints that will begin Friday and continue through early January.
Colonel Stavros Mellekas, commanding officer of the Connecticut State Police, said in a prepared statement that troopers will focus on distracted drivers and those operating under the influence.
“Please be our partners in safety by following state laws on the road,” Mellekas said.
Some of those laws include driving the speed limit, keeping a safe distance between vehicles, ensuring all passengers are wearing seatbelts, signaling when turning or changing lanes, refraining from using a phone while driving and not consuming alcohol or drugs before getting behind the wheel.
Mellekas said drivers should also be aware of any possible weather they might experience if they’re planning to travel.
“Weather conditions can change at any time during the winter,” he said. “We ask you to please heed any weather precautions prior to leaving for your destination. The safety of yourself, your family and others on the road should remain your top priority.”
In case of quick-changing weather, state police urge drivers to make sure they fill their gas tank before their trip, check their windshield wipers and fluid, check their tire pressure, fully charge their cellphone, store winter blankets and water and snacks in the vehicle, keep a shovel and sand or salt in the truck of the vehicle and keep an eye on traffic and weather conditions ahead of the trip.
And, of course, motorists should always remember the Move Over Law, which states that drivers should immediately reduce their speed and move over one lane when it is safe to do so whenever law enforcement, fire trucks, ambulances or tow trucks are occupying a lane or shoulder.
“Please give them room to do their job efficiently and safely,” state police urged.
Below are the DUI checkpoints and roving patrols planned throughout Connecticut during the holidays, which law enforcement must release in accordance with a 1990 Supreme Court ruling. The ruling states that DUI checkpoints are constitutional so long as they are announced by police.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Interstate 84 in greater Waterbury, Danbury and Southbury areas; on Route 8 in Waterbury; and on Route 7 in Brookfield and Danbury.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Route 44 and surrounding roads; and New Hartford to Route 8 in Winsted.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on I-84 in Tolland and Union, and within the greater Troop C patrol area.
On Friday, Dec. 27 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. there will be a DUI checkpoint on Route 44/Route 21 in East Putnam.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Interstate 95 and Interstate 395, and within the greater Troop E patrol area.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Route 9 and I-95 in Guilford, Madison, Clinton, Westbrook, Old Saybrook, Old Lyme, Essex, Chester, Deep River, Haddam and Killingworth.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on I-95 in the Milford and New Haven areas, Bridgeport and Westport areas and Stamford and Norwalk areas; on Route 15 in the Norwalk and Stamford area; and Route 8/Route 25 in the Bridgeport area.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on I-84, I-91, Route 2, Route 5 and Route 15.
On Monday, Dec. 30 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. there will be a DUI checkpoint on I-91 at the Exit 6 on ramp from Willow Street in New Haven.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Route 2.
From Friday, Dec. 20 through Wednesday, Jan. 1 from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. daily there will be roving DUI patrols on Route 8 in the Watertown/Litchfield area, and on state highways in the Troop L patrol area.
|STATE OF CONNECTICUT|
Department of Public Safety
1111 Country Club Road
Middletown, Connecticut 06457
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
STATE POLICE ANNOUNCE SOBRIETY CHECKPOINT LOCATIONS
TROOP DATE: CHECKPOINT LOCATION:
B 12/19/08 Roving Patrols, on Routes 7, 8, 44, 63, 202
12/23/08 Roving Patrols, on Routes 7, 8, 44, 63, 202
12/26/08 Roving Patrols, on Routes 7, 8, 44, 63, 202
L 12/20/08 Roving Patrols, on Route 8 Litchfield to
12/23/08 Roving Patrols, on Route 4 / Harwinton and
Route 118 Harwinton
12/31/08 Route 202 and Route 6 Woodbury / and Route 63.
G 12/19/08 Roving Patrols with periodic spot checks, on I-95 New Haven
to , and Route 25, exit 2 ()
to Route 111 (Trumbull)
A 12/19/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
12/20/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
12/22/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
12/23/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
12/23/08 Sobriety Checkpoint, - Resident Troopers Office,
in conjunction with the Breath Alcohol Testing Mobile Unit.
12/26/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
12/27/08 Roving Patrols, on I-84 corridor from to
H 12/19/08 Roving Patrols, I-84, I-91, Route 2 in the Greater Area
12/20/08 Roving Patrols, I-84, I-91, Route 2 in the Greater Area
12/22/08 Roving Patrols, I-84, I-91, Route 2 in the Greater Area
12/23/08 Roving Patrols, I-84, I-91, Route 2 in the Greater Area
I 12/19/08 Roving Patrols, Route 15 and Route 8
12/20/08 Roving Patrols, Route I-91 N/B and S/B, and I-691
12/23/08 Sobriety Checkpoint, Prospect Route 69
12/27/08 Route 15, Route I-91 and I-691
F 12/20/08 Sobriety Checkpoint, Westbrook Route 153, near I-95
12/26/08 Sobriety Checkpoint, Middlefield Route 66 near
in conjunction with the Breath Alcohol Testing Mobile Unit
C 12/20/08 Sobriety Checkpoint in Ellington Route 83, ,
Route 30 and Route 140
12/27/08 Sobriety Checkpoint in 195, Goose Lane,
Route 74 and
D 12/27/08 Sobriety Checkpoint in Route 6 and Route 169
12/22/08 Sobriety Checkpoint on
and Route 12 and Route 101
E 12/19/08 Roving Patrols Route2A and Route 117
12/27/08 Sobriety Checkpoint in Montville Route 32 at Route 2A
K 12/20/08 Roving patrols, Route 6 and Route 44 in Bolton
and Route 6 in North Windham
12/27/08 Sobriety Checkpoint Route 6,
in conjunction with the Breath Alcohol Testing Mobile Unit
12/31/08 Roving patrols, Route 6 and Route 44 in Bolton
and Route 6 in North Windham
- Superior express wash
- Std testing berkeley
- Kamakhya devi images
- Ogdensburg city school
- Grubb funeral home
- Red geode cake
- Funny principal gifts
- Major surplus catalog
- Conditions dnd 5e
- Ent allergy associates
Just kidding, of course, but with you fry, this can happen easily. One or two. You are still quite green, and you are asking for trouble.