Email List

To join our e-mail list, please enter your e-mail address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Shows

Sections

Classifieds

Directories

Contact

Santa Monica police will conduct a DUI/Driver's License checkpoint at an undisclosed location on Saturday, Aug. 18.
Photo by Roger Morante
Santa Monica police will conduct a DUI/Driver's License checkpoint at an undisclosed location on Saturday, Aug. 18.

News, Santa Monica, Police Department

Santa Monica DUI/Driver's License Checkpoint Set For Saturday, Aug. 18

Posted Aug. 10, 2012, 1:52 am

Mirror Staff

A DUI/Driver's License Checkpoint will be held on the evening of Saturday, August 18, the Santa Monica Police Department announced today.

SMPD Sgt. Richard Lewis said the department would conduct it at an undisclosed location within the city limits.

"This is part of an ongoing campaign to reduce the number of persons killed and injured in alcohol involved crashes," Lewis said. "DUI checkpoints are conducted to identify offenders and remove them from the street, as well as bring awareness to our community of the dangers of impaired driving."

Lewis said officers will be contacting drivers passing through the checkpoint looking for signs of alcohol and/or drug impairment.

"Drivers caught driving impaired can expect jail, license suspension, and insurance increases, as well as fines, fees, DUI classes, court probation and other expenses that can exceed $10,000," Lewis said.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), checkpoints have provided the most effective documented results of any of the DUI enforcement strategies, while also yielding considerable cost savings of $6 for every $1 spent.

The Santa Monica Police Department reminds drivers if you plan on drinking, have a designated driver or call a taxi cab to take you safely home.

Funding for this operation is provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Report Drunk Drivers. Call 911!

Post a comment

Comments

Aug. 10, 2012, 8:17:30 am

Melody C. said...

I have NEVER understood the PUBLISHING of the checkpoints. I am a mother of twins who were nearly KILLED by a drunk driver IN Santa Monica several years ago. These check points should not be advertised as precautionary areas to avoid!Advertise how many you caught AFTER the checkpoint was finished. You'd be hailed heroes even more then. By the way though....DUI drivers aren't just at night our was at 11:15 in the AM on a Wednesday!

Aug. 10, 2012, 12:54:35 pm

David Bailey said...

Hi Melody C., The court decision Ingersoll v. Palmer determined that checkpoints must be publicized: H. Advance Publicity Advance publicity is important to the maintenance of a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint. Publicity both reduces the intrusiveness of the stop and increases the deterrent effect of the roadblock. The concurring opinion in State ex rel. Ekstrom v. Justice Ct. of State, supra, 663 P.2d 992, at page 1001 explained the value of advance publicity: "Such publicity would warn those using the highways that they might expect to find roadblocks designed to check for sobriety; the warning may well decrease the chance of apprehending 'ordinary' criminals, but should certainly have a considerable deterring effect by either dissuading people from taking 'one more for the road,' persuading them to drink at home, or inducing them to take taxicabs. Any one of these goals, if achieved, would have the salutary effect of interfering with the lethal combination of alcohol and gasoline. Advance notice would limit intrusion upon personal dignity and security because those being stopped would anticipate and understand what was happening." (663 P.2d 992, 1001, conc. opn. Feldman, J.; see also State v. Deskins, supra, 673 P.2d 1174, 1182.) Publicity also serves to establish the legitimacy of sobriety checkpoints in the minds of motorists. Although the court in Jones v. State, supra, 459 So.2d 1068, found that advance publicity was not constitutionally mandated for all sobriety roadblocks, nevertheless the court offered the observation, consistent with finding reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment, that [43 Cal.3d 1347] "'[A]dvance publication of the date of an intended roadblock, even without announcing its precise location, would have the virtue of reducing surprise, fear, and inconvenience.' [Citation.]" (Id., at p. 1080.) In the instant case, substantial advance publicity accompanied each sobriety checkpoint instituted. http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/ingersoll-v-palmer-30801

SM Mirror TV