Charlotte, NC Law Firm
Stop Drinking and Driving Sobriety Check
Looking for a Charlotte DWI Lawyer Near You?
Call Today!
Stop Drinking and Driving Sobriety Check

Don’t Drink and Drive Campaign Announced

The Charlotte Observer reports that officers of the Wildlife Resources Commission and the State Highway Patrol announced the “On the Road, On the Water, Don’t Drink and Drive Campaign” today. As the weather warms, not only are more boaters expected, but more motorists are expected as well. According to the commander of the State Highway Patrol, the campaign aims to “ensure safe travel on our roadways by removing those who choose to drive while impaired.” The articles states that in 2014, there were 264 fatal collisions investigated by the State Highway Patrol and 9,169 injury wrecks. Of those, 68 of the fatal collisions and 833 of the injury wrecks were due to impaired driving. In connection with the campaign, the officers will be conducting checkpoints during the weekends of Memorial Day, Fourth of July and Labor Day.

Typically, in a traffic stop a police officer is required to have reasonable suspicion to make that stop. The Fourth Amendment provides protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and states that

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

According to the U.S. Supreme Court, a “traffic stop is a seizure even though the purpose of the stop is limited and the resulting detention quite brief.” Therefore, a police officer must have "reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot" to make a traffic stop.

However, checkpoint stops are different from other traffic stops. The North Carolina general statutes give law enforcement officers the ability to “conduct checking stations to determine compliance with the provisions” of the Motor Vehicles Chapter of the statutes. For evidence collected at a checkpoint to be admissible, the checkpoint must comply with certain requirements. G.S. 20-16.3A provides that

(a)    A law-enforcement agency may conduct checking stations to determine compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. If the agency is conducting a checking station for the purposes of determining compliance with this Chapter, it must:

(1)    Repealed by Session Laws 2006-253, s. 4, effective December 1, 2006, and applicable to offenses committed on or after that date.

(2)    Designate in advance the pattern both for stopping vehicles and for requesting drivers that are stopped to produce drivers license, registration, or insurance information.

(2a)  Operate under a written policy that provides guidelines for the pattern, which need not be in writing. The policy may be either the agency's own policy, or if the agency does not have a written policy, it may be the policy of another law enforcement agency, and may include contingency provisions for altering either pattern if actual traffic conditions are different from those anticipated, but no individual officer may be given discretion as to which vehicle is stopped or, of the vehicles stopped, which driver is requested to produce drivers license, registration, or insurance information. If officers of a law enforcement agency are operating under another agency's policy, it must be stated in writing.

(3)    Advise the public that an authorized checking station is being operated by having, at a minimum, one law enforcement vehicle with its blue light in operation during the conducting of the checking station.

(a1)  A pattern designated by a law enforcement agency pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall not be based on a particular vehicle type, except that the pattern may designate any type of commercial motor vehicle as defined in G.S. 20-4.01(3d). The provisions of this subsection shall apply to this Chapter only and are not to be construed to restrict any other type of checkpoint or roadblock which is lawful and meets the requirements of subsection (c) of this section.

(b)    An officer who determines there is a reasonable suspicion that an occupant has violated a provision of this Chapter, or any other provision of law, may detain the driver to further investigate in accordance with law. The operator of any vehicle stopped at a checking station established under this subsection may be requested to submit to an alcohol screening test under G.S. 20-16.3 if during the course of the stop the officer determines the driver had previously consumed alcohol or has an open container of alcoholic beverage in the vehicle. The officer so requesting shall consider the results of any alcohol screening test or the driver's refusal in determining if there is reasonable suspicion to investigate further.

(c)    Law enforcement agencies may conduct any type of checking station or roadblock as long as it is established and operated in accordance with the provisions of the United States Constitution and the Constitution of North Carolina.

(d)   The placement of checkpoints should be random or statistically indicated, and agencies shall avoid placing checkpoints repeatedly in the same location or proximity. This subsection shall not be grounds for a motion to suppress or a defense to any offense arising out of the operation of a checking station.

An officer does not have to have reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle at a checkpoint. However, the officer must have reasonable suspicion to further detain the driver after satisfying the primary purpose of the checkpoint (typically reviewing the driver’s valid license and registration). The North Carolina Court of Appeals has explained that

[o]nce the original purpose of the stop has been addressed, in order to justify further delay, there must be grounds which provide the detaining officer with additional reasonable and articulable suspicion or the encounter must have become consensual. Where no grounds for a reasonable and articulable suspicion exist and where the encounter has not become consensual, a detainee's extended seizure is unconstitutional.

State v. Jackson (2009)

An officer who has reasonable suspicion is permitted to “detain the driver to further investigate” under subsection (b) of the statute. The United States Supreme Court has also stated that “police officers [may] act appropriately upon information that they properly learn during a checkpoint stop justified by a lawful primary purpose, even where such action may result in the arrest of a motorist for an offense unrelated to that purpose.” (City of Indianapolis v. Edmond 2000)

The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a police officer possessed reasonable suspicion to further detain the driver when he saw an aluminum can in between the driver and passenger and determined that it was an alcoholic beverage after questioning the contents of the can. (State v. Jarrett 2009) Other facts that provide reasonable suspicion to further detain a driver are an odor of alcohol or an admission of drinking alcohol earlier in the evening (State v. Townsend 2014), as well as an odor of marijuana coming from a vehicle. (State v. Smith 2013)

If you have been arrested for DWI following a checkpoint stop, visit for legal help.

Additional DWI Articles

April 27, 2021
Injured By a Drunk Driver – Who Can I Sue?

While drunk driving accidents have been on the decline in the past few years, drunk driving is still a major problem in the United States and a leading cause of car accidents. The most recent statistics released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that approximately 28 people die in car accidents every day […]

July 28, 2020
Wined and Fined: Good Samaritan Charged with DWI

I. You Will Need a Lawyer Just because someone has had drinks, does notautomatically mean that the law should rest on their shoulders and result in an automatic conviction. That is partly why, under North Carolina law, a series of safeguards have been adopted. These safeguards often rely on, and are helpfully followed, by experienced […]

July 16, 2020
Drinking While Working: Can Workplace Culture Lead to Company Liability?

I. Working While Impaired It is a sobering crisis. We cannot say for sure just exactly how many people drink during work hours, and then drive a vehicle within a short period of time after leaving the restaurant or bar. Often, it requires help from a car accident attorney to see if this drinking is […]

May 13, 2020
Talking PC: Probable Cause and Flawed Police DWI Arrest

I. PC for DWI An experienced Charlotte criminal trial attorney is aware of the unique place that DWI charges can play in North Carolina courts. There’s no doubt that the public generally supports crackdowns on DWI offenses in North Carolina. But here’s the news flash: as important as DWI is, to maintaining public safety, it’s […]

linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram