Two intoxicated drivers caught at Sheriff’s DUI checkpoint

On July 21, 2023, two drivers were arrested for driving while under the influence, eight drivers were cited for driving without a driver’s license and one driver was cited for driving on a suspended driver’s license.  

The DUI checkpoint was held on San Vicente Boulevard north of Beverly Boulevard from 6 p.m. to 2 a.m.

DUI checkpoint locations are determined based on reported incidents of impaired driving-related crashes. The primary purpose of DUI checkpoints are to promote public safety by taking suspected impaired drivers off roads. Funding for this checkpoint was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), DUI checkpoints can reduce alcohol-related crashes and fatalities by about 9%.

The concept of DUI checkpoints was first introduced in the early 1970s. In 1973, the state of Michigan conducted the first modern-day sobriety checkpoint as part of a research project to study the effectiveness of random roadblocks in deterring drunk driving.

In the 1980s, with the rising concern over drunk driving-related accidents and fatalities, states began adopting DUI checkpoints as a law enforcement strategy to combat the problem. However, the use of checkpoints faced legal challenges, with some arguing that they violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of DUI checkpoints in the landmark case of Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz. The court held that sobriety checkpoints, when conducted with certain guidelines and procedures, did not violate the Fourth Amendment and were a reasonable means to address the pressing issue of drunk driving.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision, DUI checkpoints became more prevalent across the country. However, their use remained a subject of debate, with critics raising concerns about their effectiveness, potential racial profiling, and infringement on individual rights. While the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of DUI checkpoints at the federal level, states have the authority to determine their own policies regarding sobriety checkpoints. Some states have embraced them as a standard law enforcement tool, while others have limitations on their use or have even banned them altogether.

Studies have consistently found sobriety checkpoints to be effective in reducing crashes and crash fatalities. A 2009 meta-analysis found that sobriety checkpoints reduced crashes involving alcohol. A Community Guide Systematic Review of studies published during 2000–2012 found strong evidence that publicized sobriety checkpoints are effective in reducing alcohol-involved crash fatalities.

High enforcement and publicity are important to the success of sobriety checkpoints. Five studies in the Community Guide Systematic Review measured media campaign success. All of them found increases in awareness of messaging about drinking and driving or checkpoints. The largest increases in awareness were also in the studies with the largest decreases in alcohol-involved crash fatalities.

Although sobriety checkpoints are effective in reducing alcohol-involved crash fatalities, few states conduct them regularly due to lack of funding and law enforcement personnel. A 2010–2011 survey of law enforcement agencies in the United States found that 73% of state and 42% of local law enforcement agencies had conducted at least one sobriety checkpoint in the past year.

The two main costs to implement sobriety checkpoints are law enforcement personnel and paid publicity. While typical checkpoints use 15 or more officers, checkpoints using a smaller number of officers (three to five) can be successfully conducted. Publicity is essential to the success of sobriety checkpoints.