et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz
Significance, One Checkpoint Attempt, Challenged Immediately, Brown V. Texas, What About Airport Checkpoints?
Petitioners
Michigan Department of State Police, et al.
Respondents
Rick Sitz, et al.
Petitioners' Claim
That the lower court had erred in ruling roadside sobriety checkpoints were unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioners
Thomas L. Casey
Chief Lawyer for Respondents
Mark Granzotto
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
14 June 1990
Decision
That sobriety checkpoints do not violate constitutional rights.
Related Cases
- Perez v. Campbell, 402 U.S. 637 (1971).
- United States v. Ortiz, 422 U.S. 891 (1975).
- Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979).
Sources
Bureau of Justice Statistics Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics--1996. Washington, DC: U.S. Government, 1997.
Additional topics
- Mike Tyson Trial: 1992 - Brutal Attack
- Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission Metro Broadcasting - Significance, Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action In Broadcasting, Further Readings
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - Further Readings
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - Significance
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - One Checkpoint Attempt
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - Challenged Immediately
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - Brown V. Texas
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - What About Airport Checkpoints?
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - The Decision
- et al. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz - Drunk Driving Statistics
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994