AGENDA #5c

MEMORANDUM

TO:                              Mayor and Town Council

FROM:                        W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

SUBJECT:                  Follow up Report on Police Stops

DATE:                        March 6, 2006

PURPOSE

The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to a request for information about police traffic stops.

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been publicity in the local media about traffic stops and checkpoints conducted by the Police Department. Motorists have expressed concern that there was no reason for their being stopped. 

DISCUSSION

Generally, vehicle stops are based on an officer’s visual observation of what is believed to be a violation of North Carolina law.  This type of vehicle stop must be supported by the officer’s reasonable and articulated suspicion that a violation has been committed.  Examples of this type of stop are for speed limit violations, running a stop sign, erratic driving, and other such offenses.

Officers also stop vehicles at systematic roadblocks, usually referred to as checkpoints. The purpose of conducting vehicle checkpoints is to improve safety for motorists, and to charge individuals who are violating State or local laws.  Checkpoints accomplish several functions in a very short period of time.  Officers look for persons driving without a driver’s license or with a suspended driver’s license, registration or emission violations, and seatbelt and child safety seat violations.  Officers assist motorists whose child safety seats are installed incorrectly.  Checkpoints are also a part of the “Click It or Ticket” and “Booze it and Lose It” campaigns sponsored by the Governor’s Highway Safety Program.

Officers can not randomly stop single vehicles for the sole purpose of checking a driver’s license or registration.  However, officers may stop vehicles at a checkpoint if every vehicle is stopped or if a patterned method is used to determine which vehicles are stopped (for example, every fourth car).

In Chapel Hill, checkpoints are conducted in various locations throughout the Town with the following requirements:

• a systematic plan for stopping vehicles must be in place (a written plan is required for an impaired driving checkpoint)
• weather and the 911 call load must be taken into consideration
• there must be a need for traffic enforcement in the area
• motorists are not significantly inconvenienced
• the area is reasonably safe for officers and the public
• the checkpoint must be approved by a supervisor

Impaired driving checkpoints are conducted in Chapel Hill no more twice per year. This type of checkpoint requires considerable manpower and usually involves the assistance of officers from surrounding agencies and the North Carolina State Highway Patrol, through mutual aid agreements.  The most recent impaired driving checkpoint was conducted in December 2004, during which we arrested 10 motorists for impaired driving, issued 13 citations for driving without a license, and issued additional citations for other motor vehicle violations.

The authority to conduct license checkpoints and impaired driving checkpoints is based on North Carolina General Statute 20-16.3.  This statute provides that an impaired driving checkpoint must be carried out in accordance with a written plan Driver license checkpoints also entail a systematic method of stopping vehicles, but no written plan is required.

The constitutionality of checkpoints has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court and the North Carolina Supreme Court in the following cases:

• Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990):  This was the first major U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue of checkpoints conducted to promote highway safety.  It upheld stops of vehicles at checkpoints without individualized suspicion, so long as the vehicles are stopped according to a neutral, articulable standard, e.g. every vehicle, every other vehicle, etc.
• State v. Mitchell, 358 N.C. 63 (2004):  The North Carolina Supreme Court confirmed that a written plan is not required for law enforcement to conduct license checkpoints so long as officers have received supervisory approval and a checkpoint is conducted in a neutral manner.
• Illinois v. Lidster, 124 S.Ct. 885 (2004):  A checkpoint conducted near an intersection where a “hit and run” had occurred, for the purpose of handing out flyers and asking for information about the incident, was held to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

CONCLUSION

The use of checkpoints is a valuable tool for our Police Department.  In a typical two-hour license checkpoint, we issue approximately 15 citations for offenses such as driving with a revoked license, seatbelt violation, no operator’s license, and expired vehicle registration.  Their careful use allows our police officers to enforce laws, enhance public safety, and interact with our citizens.

ATTACHMENTS

1. North Carolina General Statute 21-16.3 (p. 4).

2. Chapel Hill Police Department Impaired Driving Checkpoint Plan (p. 5).