Letter to Director Perry of DPS:
Director Chris Perry,
DPS,
Dear Director Perry,
I was perusing a video on youtube, regarding a Administrative roadblock conducted By the NHP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG7niM9PzeE
I have several concerns about the legality of this Checkpoint Conducted in the lake Tahoe area.
• As pointed out by the person in the video, there are no "flares, lantern's, or burning beam's, placed near the Signs to attract attention, as required by law. "...and a burning beam light, flare or lantern must be placed near the signs to attract the attention of the traffic to the signs..." (NRS 484B.570)
• Pursuant to law "warning signs are required stating that a police stop lies ahead, Warning Signs are Yellow in color, the Department has erred in the selection of a regulatory black on white configuration. The statute is clear that the sign is meant to warn. Source:
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ (NRS 484B.570)
While I do not have a measurement capability, I am assuming that the officers measured 1320 feet from the "warning Signs" to the STOP sign. (at least it appears so) That is the correct distance for the sign, however since the STOP sign Marks the entrance to the roadblock, None of the "observing" troopers are legally within the roadblock, as they are on the wrong side of the STOP sign :
(b) At the entrance to the administrative roadblock: (emphasis added)
(1) A sign must be placed near the centerline of the highway displaying the word “Stop” in letters of sufficient size and luminosity to be readable at a distance of not less than 50 yards in the direction affected by the administrative roadblock, either in daytime or darkness. (NRS 484B.570)
• The roadblock is NRS deficient also in the aspect of Red flashing or burning light required at the entrance to the checkpoint,
(b) At the entrance to the administrative roadblock: (emphasis added)
(2) At least one red flashing or intermittent light, on and burning, must be placed at the side of the highway, clearly visible to the oncoming traffic at a distance of not less than 100 yards. (NRS 484B.570)
It appears the cruiser on the side of the highway nearest the roadblock had every other color, besides red flashing on the car. If there was a red light flashing on the light bar of the cruiser it was NRS insufficient as it was not clearly visible. If the white SUV approximately 500 feet prior to the stop was supposed to be the "red flashing light," Then there is no STOP sign, at the entrance as required by law, and your "warning signs would certainly not been 1320 feet from the white SUV.
• The Trooper Utilized a administrative roadblock for the purposes of identifying a individual. This is strictly forbidden by the NRS :
1. The police officers in this State may establish, in their respective jurisdictions, administrative roadblocks upon the highways of this State for any lawful purpose other than identifying the occupants of a vehicle or because of the existence of an emergency. (NRS 484B.570)
I hereby submit a "professional Standards" claim against the officer who Coerced the Citizen to Show his ID at an administrative roadblock, (NRS 207.190) Please advise me of the tracking number.
Director Perry, The Saddest part of this whole mess other than the ID is all of the bungled pieces in this catastrophe oppose the intent stated in the law.
2. To warn and protect the traveling public, administrative roadblocks established by police officers must meet the following requirements: (484B.570)
Or it is possibly the fact that the dunk drivers can, and unfortunately should win in court!
In liberty,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Sorry it formatted funky.