BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1389 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 1389 (Allen) As Amended May 19, 2011 Majority vote TRANSPORTATION 11-3 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Bonnie Lowenthal, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, | | |Blumenfield, Bonilla, | |Bradford, Charles | | |Buchanan, Eng, Furutani, | |Calderon Campos, Davis, | | |Galgiani, Logue, Norby, | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, | | |Portantino, Solorio | |Mitchell, Solorio | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Jeffries, Achadjian, |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, | | |Miller | |Nielsen, Smyth, Wagner | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Sets standards for the establishment and operation of sobriety checkpoints. Specifically, this bill : 1)Allows the California Highway Patrol (CHP), cities, and counties to establish, on highways, roads, or streets under their respective jurisdictions, a sobriety checkpoint program to identify drivers whose blood alcohol content (BAC) exceeds allowable limits or who are driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). 2)Requires such a program to be conducted by the local governmental agency or department with the primary responsibility for traffic law enforcement. 3)Requires supervisory law enforcement personnel to select the site of the checkpoint and to determine the procedures for a checkpoint operation, but not limited to, time and location. 4)Requires the law enforcement agency conducting the checkpoint to employ a neutral methodology for determining which vehicles to stop at the checkpoint or, alternatively, to stop all vehicles that drive through the checkpoint. 5)Requires the law enforcement agency to ensure that there are proper lighting, warning signs and signals, clearly AB 1389 Page 2 identifiable official vehicles, and uniformed personnel to minimize the risk to motorists and their passengers and to operate a checkpoint only when traffic volume allows for the safe operation of the program. 6)Requires the location of the checkpoint to be based on a location that has a high incidence of DUI arrests or a high volume of DUI-related accidents, as determined by supervisory officers of the law enforcement agency conducting the sobriety checkpoint. 7)Requires the law enforcement agency to conduct the checkpoint after dusk or at a time and for a duration that are reasonable and effective to the objective of deterring DUI offenses. 8)Requires a driver who elects to drive through the checkpoint to stop and submit to an inspection when signs and displays are posted requiring that stop. 9)Requires each motorist at a checkpoint to be detained so that the officer may briefly question the driver and look for signs of intoxication, and then permit him or her to drive on if no such signs are displayed. 10)Requires the law enforcement agency to provide at least 48 hours advance notice to the public of the general location of the checkpoint. 11)Requires the time of day and duration of checkpoints to be carefully reviewed and the effectiveness, safety, and motorists' concerns to be taken into account. 12)Prohibits a peace officer or any other authorized person from causing the impoundment of a vehicle at a sobriety checkpoint established under these provisions or any other law, unless the driver of the vehicle is suspected of driving with a suspended or revoked license, being a habitual traffic offender, driving with a license that has been suspended or revoked for a DUI offense, driving under the age of 21 with a BAC of .05 or higher, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, in a vehicle subject to impoundment for fleeing a peace officer, in a vehicle that was probably used as the means of committing a public offense, other than driving without a license or use of one's vehicle by an unlicensed AB 1389 Page 3 driver, in a vehicle that itself is probably evidence that tends to show that a crime has been committed or that probably contains evidence that cannot readily be removed that tends to show that a crime has been committed, other than driving without a license or use of one's vehicle by an unlicensed driver. 13)Prohibits the impoundment of a vehicle due to the driver not having a valid driver's license if the driver is able to obtain a validly licensed driver to drive the vehicle, the driver is able to park or remove the vehicle in a manner that does not impede traffic or threaten public safety until a validly licensed driver can retrieve the vehicle, or a peace officer, or a similarly authorized traffic enforcement officer, is able to readily and lawfully remove the vehicle to a place that does not impede traffic or threaten public safety. 14)Precludes a state or local governmental agency that establishes or conducts a checkpoint under these provisions from being liable for any claims related to the parking or removal of the vehicle. 15)Requires a law enforcement agency that conducts a sobriety checkpoint program to provide advance notice of the checkpoint location to the public within a minimum of 48 hours of the checkpoint operation. 16)Prohibits a driver who does not wish to submit to the checkpoint from being compelled to drive through the checkpoint. 17)Requires the law enforcement agency conducting the checkpoint to post signs announcing the checkpoint sufficiently in advance of the location of the checkpoint to permit motorists to not enter the location and requires such an agency to ensure that there is a clear and safe way to turn away from the checkpoint for those motorists who choose not to drive through the checkpoint. 18)Prohibits law enforcement agencies from conducting combined sobriety checkpoint and vehicle inspection programs. EXISTING LAW : AB 1389 Page 4 1)Allows a peace officer who determines that a person was driving a vehicle without ever having been issued a driver's license, to either immediately arrest that person and cause the removal and seizure of that vehicle or, if the vehicle is involved in a traffic collision, cause the removal and seizure of the vehicle without the necessity of arresting the person. 2)Provides that such an impoundment will be for 30 days. 3)Allows counties, by ordinance, to establish on highways under their respective jurisdictions, a combined vehicle inspection and sobriety checkpoint program to check for violations of vehicle exhaust standards and to identify drivers who are driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs or are persons under 21 driving with a BAC of .05 or more. 4)Requires such a program to be conducted by the local agency or department with the primary responsibility for traffic law enforcement. 5)Requires the driver of a motor vehicle to stop and submit to an inspection conducted under these provisions when signs and displays are posted requiring that stop. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, negligible state costs. COMMENTS : Proponents of this bill contend that in recent years, sobriety checkpoints have increasingly targeted unlicensed drivers whose cars may then be impounded. (These impoundments are typically for a term of 30 days, which can effectively result in the forfeiture of the car, since towing and impoundment fees may well exceed the value of the vehicle.) In 2009, they complain, police impounded more than 24,000 vehicles at checkpoints, roughly seven times higher than the 3,200 drunk driving arrests at roadway operations. Some agencies, in fact, tow as many as 20 vehicles of unlicensed drivers for each DUI arrest made, according to a 2010 report by the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California, Berkeley. The percentage of vehicle seizures in these roadway operations has increased 53% statewide compared to 2007. AB 1389 Page 5 Proponents further assert that "sobriety checkpoints are set up in areas that do not have a high correlation of DUI arrests or accidents, and target certain neighborhoods or locations where high populations of low-income families or other low-income communities. In one Northern California community that is predominantly Latino, DUI checkpoints have resulted in 121 impounded cars compared to just 4 DUI arrests in a 2-year period." The California Supreme Court in 1987 rendered a decision on the premiere California roadblock case, Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1321. This decision set the standard for how law enforcement agencies must conduct roadblocks sobriety checkpoints. The Supreme Court identified a number of factors for minimizing intrusiveness on the individual while balancing the needs of society in keeping drunk drivers off the road: decision-making at the supervisory level, limits on the discretion of field officers, maintenance of safety conditions, reasonable location, time and duration, visibility of the roadblock, length and nature of detention, and advance publicity. Furthermore, in the case of Miranda v. City of Cornelius (9th Cir. 2005, 429 F.3d 858), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a car that can be safely parked by a licensed driver may not be impounded under the "community caretaker provision." This bill seeks to codify the standards established by those decisions. Immigrants' rights groups contend law enforcement agencies often conduct checkpoints in broad daylight or in locations unrelated to patterns of drunk driving, "which demonstrates the need for statewide uniformity and the need for specific guidelines to make the checkpoints as effective as possible in order to enhance public safety for all Californians. Even when there are safe and reasonable alternatives, authorities are also impounding cars of unlicensed drivers at checkpoints and leaving people on the street, in some cases with small children, to find their way home. AB 1389 will enhance community-policing efforts on the ground by providing both law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve clear guidance and expectations on checkpoints." Analysis Prepared by : Howard Posner / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 AB 1389 Page 6 FN: 0000773