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