Suit says Escondido (CA) Police checkpoints violate law

From [HERE]

ESCONDIDO — The ACLU has sent a letter to Escondido’s police chief alleging that on at least one occasion last year, his officers denied freedom of speech for people protesting checkpoints for sobriety and driver’s licenses.

In a related development, a lawsuit challenging those checkpoints has been transferred to Vista Superior Court. It argues that the practice, which critics describe as a veiled attempt to target illegal immigrants, violates state law.

The suit, which attorney Tomas Flores filed on behalf of Escondido resident Rich Dudka, said Dudka’s truck was impounded on Oct. 5, 2009, after he went through a checkpoint, and that the vehicle was later sold because he couldn’t pay the impound charges.

Last year, responding to criticism about its operations, the Escondido Police Department stopped conducting checkpoints that focus solely on driver’s licenses. It instead launched joint checkpoints for DUI and license violations.

The letter from the American Civil Liberties Union was sent to police Chief Jim Maher on Jan. 20. It cited at least one videotaped incident when protesters holding signs warning motorists about a nearby checkpoint were told to go elsewhere because they stood within 500 feet of a freeway interchange.

ACLU leaders said the officers involved acted professionally, but also said they wrongly quoted a state regulation as the basis for moving the demonstrators. That vehicle code is intended to prevent solicitors from operating near an interchange; it does not ban peaceful demonstrations, the organization said.

The ACLU also said in the letter that political candidates often stand within 500 feet of freeway interchanges holding campaign signs.

This week, City Attorney Jeffrey Epp said Escondido is sensitive to free-speech issues and will “review the facts and advise the Police Department accordingly.”

In the lawsuit, which has not been scheduled for a court hearing, Dudka contends that driver’s license checkpoints conflict with state laws that prohibit stopping someone only on the suspicion that they might not have a license. Police generally must have probable cause to stop a motorist, such as noticing a traffic violation being committed, seeing a broken taillight or observing someone littering by throwing a cigarette butt out of the window, for instance.

Attorney Dudka seeks to have the litigation turned into a class-action lawsuit with the goal of compensating everyone whose car was impounded between 2004 and 2010 in Escondido as a result of a checkpoint.

Flores declined to comment on the case, other than to issue the following statement: “Driver’s license checkpoints, as practiced in the city of Escondido, run counter to our American ideals of freedom. We look forward to our day in court to defend against the erosion of our individual liberties.”

Epp said the city likely will file a request to dismiss the lawsuit.