Concord Police Department arrested three drivers on suspicion of DUI while conducting a DUI enforcement patrol on March 19.
“Driving under the influence is dangerous, illegal and puts a further strain on resources in the middle of a pandemic,” Lt. Mark Robison said.
“We are still out there and will not hesitate to stop drivers who drive impaired.”
Drivers charged with DUI face an average of $13,500 in fines and penalties, as well as a suspended license.
Concord Police Department reminds the public that impaired driving is not just from alcohol. Some prescription medications or over-the-counter drugs may interfere with driving. Always follow directions for use and read warning labels about driving or operating heavy machinery.
While medicinal and recreational marijuana are legal, driving under the influence of marijuana is illegal.
Concord Police Department will be holding a series of DUI enforcement patrols throughout the year to keep our roadways safe.
Funding for this DUI Patrol was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Thank you CPD
How do they test for marijuana?
They offer you Taco Bell and see how eager you are to eat it.
Unconstitutional. The willingness of the citizenry to accept small infringements like this is a precursor to tyranny.
You’re going to have to explain how arresting drunk drivers is unconstitutional.
Cowellian. I think the fact that I need to explain why the police/government cannot pull you over looking for a possible crime is unconstitutional, is the reason we are in this current Covid lock down predicament. I support law enforcement and I want our streets safe, but I will not support law enforcement’s disregard of our 4th amendment right to our person, houses, papers and effects. To stop search and question a citizen the government needs probable cause. A person driving a car on a public street does not meet the definition of probable cause.
Lets say I am a police officer. I see you on the driving down the street and follow you home. After watching you exit your vehicle and walk to your house I knock on your front door and ask you to take a sobriety test, not because you were swerving or driving erratic, but because it is late at night and there is a possibility that you are drunk. After you pass the test because you are good law abiding citizen that follows the law, the officer would like to enter your house to search for a possible meth lab or any other criminal activity. By your standard that is OK?
“Show me the man and I will find the crime” is a dangerous way to run our police department.
JRocks, do you wear a mask in public?
Asking for myself.
@ JRocks
Please give me your best definition of Probable Cause.
Then give me your understanding of criminal adjudication.
Whenever a police officer makes a car stop for a violation of the vehicle code, like driving without headlights during the hours of darkness, speeding, driving too slowly (10 in a 35), rolling a stop sign, running a red light, weaving from lane to lane or weaving from side to side within a lane or being stopped at a green light, which are all tale tail signs of DUI, the officer is making a stop based upon probable cause and nothing more.
Unless the officer is clairvoyant how could it be otherwise?
Every arrest a police officer makes is based upon probable cause; either based on what they is see, what they are told or an order from the court (warrant) – which is also based upon probable cause.
Until the case has been adjudicated in court, they are innocent of the crime they are accused of.
Your example of the officer following someone to their door is egregious and would be an example of violation of someone’s constitutional rights but my examples, which I believe are the norm and not the exception, are perfectly lawful.
@JRocks – I don’t suppose you have any evidence that people were stopped without probable cause?
@Janus
I agree with all of the examples you used for probable cause, and I agree they are lawful. My argument is that there is no probable cause when you set up a road block and question every single driver. You cannot apply the probability that someone is drunk on a group of people that have done nothing to alert an officer that they are indeed impaired. Driving a vehicle on a public street is not probable cause. What if they set up random road blocks and checked immigration status? We have tons of illegals here. There is a high probability that they will find some when they set up a road block. How about arrest warrant check points? How about a stolen goods check point?
@ Concord Guy
I where a mask where I have to. I don’t see the correlation.
@Rollo
Where is the evidence of probable cause? Is driving a car at night probable cause?
@JRocks – please point out in the story any reference to a roadblock or even a checkpoint being used to stop vehicles.
The article characterized the enforcement as “DUI enforcement patrol” not as a checkpoint/roadblock. I personally don’t like checkpoints because 1) they’re generally not that effective and 2) in my opinion they infringe on our rights – even though courts have said they’re legal.
JRocks didn’t understand the story, which explains their response.
For the record, I am not a fan of DUI checkpoints, either. I am disappointed that the Supreme Court has approved them, but they are legal.
@Bill – Agreed. In the decision regarding checkpoints, the Supreme Court admitted that they’re an infringement of our rights protected under the 4th Amendment, but the degree of infringement is outweighed by the enhancement to public safety. Sound familiar?
I do not smoke pot but since it is legal how do the police check to see if drivers are impared if there is no blood or breathalizer test? Aren’t they by their own defination “high”?
Amy-
Here is how officers check for marijuana
impairment.
https://reason.org/commentary/how-do-police-officers-determine-marijuana-impairment-in-drivers/
It is the standard Field Sobriety Tests. If during the Breath Test the arrested blows 0.0% the officer can request a blood test where THC, stimulants or depressants can be identified.
@Shoulda Coulda….I just hate it when I have “pulsating pupils”!
If I just got done playing a 48 hr game of Call of Duty will my pupils pulsate?
I think you are referring to Horizonal Gaze Nystagmus and no playing call of duty will not cause it no matter how much or how long you play.
Nystagmus an involuntary eye movement which may cause the eye to rapidly move from side to side, up and down, or in a circle. Bouncing is a better layman’s term than pulsating pupils.
Brain damage, alcohol use and some drugs cause HGN. It also occurs natural in some people without brain damage. The actor Pruitt Taylor Vince is a perfect example.
Everyone who is under the influence of alcohol will have HGN but not everyone who has HGN is under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
HGN is just one of several Field Sobriety Tests given during a DUI investigation.
Someone’s been watching too many movies
No planning skill, Amateurs