Random Checkpoints and the 4th Amendment(NC)?

Question

For the individual who responded that my son probably got mouthy; I am sure that you are a cop so here is what I have to say to you....my son asked him a simple question, "do I have to present my licsense to you". At that point the cop immediately escalated the situation, attempted to rip the key out of his ignition, threatend to arrest him, and started to bully him verbally. My son's girl friend called me immediately, I live 2 minutes away and went to the site of the checkpoint. On arrival I asked what was going on, my son told me, and the officer did not dispute what was said on his actions as described by my son. Its a simple question, would have been a simple answer. After wasting about 30 minutes of my son's time. The officer returned with a ticket for faulty equipment (unsafe tire or something). The vehicle just passed a NC safety inspection, but the officer (Trooper! haha) was so highly trained, that with his mere vision determined that the treadwear exceeded the max allowable threshold. This was thrown out in court by the judge, I see this as additional harrassment...

If I had asked the same question and recieved the same treatment I think that the situation would have immediately escalated to violence. Both me and my son are decorated veterans. Pay our taxes and support our government, he is still in the military (82nd Airborned) and I am a retired Special Forces Officer.

I dont have a problem with them slowing down or even stopping traffic...however, without being under suspicion of a crime, or without sometype of probable cause I dont see where he has a right to request my DL.

How does the Fourth Amendment apply to random checkpoints (NC)?

These check points are routinely established in the same spot which violates the NC statute "Under G.S. 20-16.3A(d), the “placement of checkpoints should be random or statistically indicated, and agencies shall avoid placing checkpoints repeatedly in the same location or proximity” which is irritating to me. They have also harassed my son at these check points. My question is "if I refuse to show "my papers (license, insurance, registration)" on the basis that LE has no probable cause am I in the right? What does it mean "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects".

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Answer 1

I don't know why a Sergeant in the 82nd Airborne needs his father to fight his battles for him. Additionally, when he asked the Police of he had to show his license was obviously flippant or deliberately baiting the officers into a confrontation. The Supreme Court of the US and the Supreme Court of NC have clearly defined that check point stops are legal, and don't violate the 4th amendment, if conducted in accordance with Court guidelines. If your son had been found guilty, he would have been able to challenge the propriety of the check point, but since he was not, it isa moot point. Someone already told you, the 4th amendment does not protect the citizens against all searches and seizures, only the unreasonable ones. And, also like someone else said, it is a Judge who determines the reasonableness, not you.



The reply that you wrote to the other answerer shows that you are both unreasonable and confrontational. The Police conduct those checkpoints to protect you and your family from drunk drivers, who kill more people annually than have been killed during the entire war in Afghanistan. A good citizen would realize that, and be willing to cooperative. That is not GIVING UP any rights, it is being a responsible citizen.



I too am a decorated veteran and have been a police officer for over 40 years. You attitude is both shocking and disappointing.

Answer 2

What a crybaby!



You act like there was some horrible violations of your rights, when all they did was their job. Both you and you kid need to grow up, a whole lot.



If you refuse to show "papers" the cops will end up arresting you. Driving is a privilege, not a right! The state makes the rules, gives you a license, and lets you drive. If you decide you don't want to play by the rules, it is easy, give up the license.



The cops did not search your kid's car. They did not arrest him. They did nothing but ask him to show proof that he was driving in compliance with state law. If he can't handle that, I sure hope his MOS has him in the rear with gear.



Just in case you didn't know it, you can't take the 4th amendment (or any other) verbatim. Over the last 200 plus years, there is a body of case law that serves to define and interpret the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the final say, not just the words originally written on the paper. Most kids learn that in High School.

Answer 3

Ah yes, another constitutional expert.



1) If you feel the checkpoints are not "random" then go ahead and challenge it in court but you will then find out just how many other checkpoints may or may not be conducted over a period of time and how the Courts consider the term "random". But at least you'll know.



2) If you feel that LE has no right to ask for your documentation at a checkpoint then by all means refuse and you will then learn how the Courts view intrusions in varying degrees. There are plenty of things that go on each day that are technically and by strict definition a "violation of someone's rights" but that the courts have held to be a reasonable intrusion on individual rights in the greater public interest. Just because you feel the search (requirement to hand over your documentation) is unreasonable certainly does not mean the Courts view it as such.



But by all means, go ahead and give it a try. Let us know how it all works out for ya. Law students may soon be studying new case law called Buck v the State.

Answer 4

Well as to the altercation with the Police Officer, I can offer no insight or answers. I was not present and there is no way I can pass any sort of judgment on hearsay and second hand evidence. However, as to the Checkpoint question. Every state has their own regulations and laws regarding police checkpoints. But you have already posted the law in your state. However, what it does NOT say, is that police ARE entitled to set up routine checkpoints on areas that have statistically higher speed violations and drunk driving incidents. They do so for public safety reasons. So it is quite possible that its a problem area they are enforcing. Just food for thought.

Answer 5

forget the really long load of crap you posted



what everybody knows is kids very rarely tell the truth to their parents



they will embellish the story to present themselves in better light than the truth would reveal



the kid probably lied to look better



the purpose of random checkpoints is to catch violators



would you prefer no checkpoints were ever used?



OK



would you be happy if a drunk driver who was not stopped at a random checkpoint because they stopped doing that to keep people like you happy ran over and killed your Son? your wife ?



some other loved one?



would you be perfectly content in that situation knowing that you did not have to tolerate Random Checkpoints that were only there to F U C K up your day personally



grow up fool

Answer 6

This has nothing to do with the police this has to do with your politicians.



The only legal roadblock should be a search for an escaped criminal or search for a terrorist.



All other roadblocks are not necessary and are just fishing expeditions for violations of the law and should not be allowed in a country that values individual freedom.



The only way to change the law or what was done is to challenge what happened in court.

Answer 7

the supreme court has already ruled on this matter and it is legal to do. But i definitely would talk to higher ups in the police department about the rudeness of there officers.

Answer 8

When my car got stolen the clowns who arrived to take my statement told me it was a civil matter. I kid you not. That's the quality of personnel you can expect these days. When I told him he needed to go back to cop school... THEN they had time to f**k with me. When I asked him if he cared to discuss it with the Magistrate over coffee and doughnuts I thought the guy was going to bust a vein. Needless to say they were all talk.

Answer 9

First of all, there is a ton of real interesting Supreme Court case law on check point DUI stops. I suggest you read that, along with NC Supreme Court case law, which will further define what is or isn't kay. Instead of playing jail house lawyer, you might want to hire areal one. i don't see anybody answering you on here that has Esq. after his name.



Also, i don't know what happened anymore than you do. But, if your kid has a driver's license, he had to pass the driver's test and knows that he has to show it to a cop on demand if he is driving car. So his "do I have to present my license to you". is a smart a$$ answer, and you know it.



Giving someone a ticket that gets dismissed is NOT harassment. It is a cop accusing him of an offense and a Judge finding him not guilty. Cops don't decide you are guilty, they just charge you. the Judge does the rest. So, he beat the ticket, that sounds fine to me.



Maybe you didn't read the whole thing...."against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, " Not ALL searches and seizures. Actually iot is not the cops who decide iof it is reasonable, it is a Judges call. As long as the cops do it in "good faith", they are allowed to screw up, the Judge corrects the problem.



If you are retired military, you sure don't sound like it. You sound like you have a real resentment for authority and a smart mouth kid that you are over protective of. And, if he is old enough to be a Sgt. in the Army, he is old enough to fight his own legal battles without Daddy getting involved.

Answer 10

the USSC already ruled random checkpoints are constitutional. If you have an issue with an individual cop then file a complaint against this person with the police agency. Other than that get over it. And yes I do believe that both you and your son got mouthy. And yes if you are operating a motor vehicle on any public roadway you are required to present a valid driver's license when a law enforcement officer requests it. Check you state's driver's manual.

Answer 11

To michael t...the internet tough guy. save your parental expertise on how kids lie. My kid is a Sergeant in the Army and he told me what happened in front of the officer so his story is pretty credible the judge seemed to think so also. Since you like to call people names I have a few for you... you are either a jack boot thug cop who also violates peoples rights, or a sheep who is ok with someone violating their rights as long as it doesnt involve them. Or if it does that it is ok because it is for the greater good...today its a roadblock, tomorrow they are searching you for no reason...I guess you think that is ok too if it is some kid, or maybe if he is black its ok....you make me puke punk. FU



If an individual is drunk and the officer has probable cause, he can ask for ID, arrest the individual, and prosecute to the full extent of the law. This wasnt the case tough guy...he didnt have probable cause, he didnt check for any intoxication, and it was harassment. The cop was lucky my kid is respectful,



I think the 4th Amendment is pretty clear, what is not clear is the NC statute on roadblocks and that is the question. I dont need some argumentative punk like you to tell me anything.