Judge: No Breath Tests for Pedestrians
Legal News Center
[##_1L|1022404394.jpg|width="127" height="85" alt=""|_##]A federal judge on Wednesday blocked a Michigan law that requires pedestrians under 21 to submit to a breath test without a search warrant. The American Civil Liberties Union, which had sued on behalf of four college students, said the law is the only one of its kind in the country. U.S. District Judge David Lawson in Detroit ruled that it was unconstitutional to force non-drivers to submit to preliminary breath tests without a warrant.
"This is a tremendous victory for the civil liberties of young adults," said Kary Moss, executive director of the ACLU of Michigan.
Under the 1998 law, pedestrians under 21 who refuse to take a breath test face a $100 fine. To require a breath analysis, an officer must have reasonable cause to believe that a minor has been drinking.
Backers of the law have said police need breath testers and other tools to enforce the legal drinking age.
In 2006, the city of Mount Pleasant and Isabella County agreed to pay $5,000 to two of the plaintiffs, Cullin Stewart and Samuel Maness, and stop warrantless pedestrian breath tests until Lawson issued a final ruling.
Both Stewart and Maness attended a 2003 post-prom party in Isabella County where, according to the lawsuit, an interagency police task force called the "Party Patrol" broke up the party, placed the students in a circle and asked if they had been drinking.
They had to blow into a portable breath tester, according to the suit. Stewart was not charged, but Maness was issued a citation accusing him of being a minor in possession of alcohol.
Michigan State Police, Central Michigan University and Saginaw County's Thomas Township Police Department also are defendants in the case.
A telephone message seeking comment was left at the office of state police spokeswoman Shanon Akans.
Related listings
-
High court to review lethal injection
Legal News Center 09/26/2007[##_1L|1000547554.jpg|width="180" height="135" alt=""|_##]Facing near legal chaos in states that use the death penalty, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision Tuesday to review a Kentucky lethal injection case signals the justices are prepared to try to s...
-
Supreme Court to rule on lethal injection executions
Legal News Center 09/25/2007[##_1L|1374613952.jpg|width="104" height="138" alt=""|_##]The U.S. Supreme Court said on Tuesday it would decide whether the commonly used lethal injection method of execution violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The natio...
-
Pasadena church wants apology from IRS
Legal News Center 09/22/2007The rector of a liberal Pasadena church today demanded an apology and a clarification from the Internal Revenue Service after being notified that the agency had closed a lengthy investigation of the church over a 2004 antiwar sermon -- but also found...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.