What were the reasons the DUI checkpoint was illegal? You measured with a wheel. What are the measurements supposed to be? Where do you find the legal standards for a DUI checkpoint in Nevada? Just curious.
NRS 484B.570 sets the requirements of the checkpoints in this state.
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-484B.html#NRS484BSec570
There were three points rendering this checkpoint unlawful.
First, at the point where the Stop Signs are located, law requires officers to also have a blinking red light, but they did not. The only red lights at the checkpoint were tiny (almost toy-like) flashing lights on signs hundreds of feet prior to the stop.
Second, police are required to put up warning signs a quarter of a mile prior to the checkpoint warning traffic of the roadblock ahead. Senate Bill 84 reduced that this year to just 700 feet in urban areas, but that doesn't take effect until October 1, so the quarter mile provision is still in effect. The signs were setup approximately 180 feet north of Naples Dr, which put them exactly 0.25 miles from where the checkpoint ends.
The problem here is that Naples Dr is the only legal turn that can be made to avoid going through the checkpoint, and a right turn is onto a dead-end, so you must turn left. Plus at this point, Paradise is 5 lanes wide going one-way. If you are in the far right lane, 180 feet is far too insufficient to be able to safely and legally avoid the checkpoint. The intent of the law is clearly to allow drivers the right to make a decision as to whether to submit to the checkpoint or not, and to have enough time and distance to do so safely.
I spoke with the commanding officer, Lieutenant Fletcher, and he contends that his signs were legal. Admittedly, Metro has come a long way since I began checking on them. They have taken steps to secure their signs against the wind knocking them down, and they now strictly adhere to a quarter mile limit. Unfortunately, they continue to measure that distance from the wrong spot. He argues that the distance requirement is met regardless of the ability to avoid the checkpoint legally, and the checkpoint begins where they setup cones. Using his logic, if the checkpoint were moved 200 feet south of its actual location, the first warning signs would not have to be placed until beyond the "point of no return". If that's the case, what's the point of the sign in the first place? My contention is that it doesn't matter where police setup the cones, the checkpoint "begins" when I have no choice but to go through it.
Finally, Fletcher admits giving all officers a direct order that they are to order every driver to "roll down your window all the way" and if the window doesn't roll down to "open the door". He says that failing to comply will result in your arrest for disobeying the "lawful orders of a police officer". He goes on to explain that "a lawful order is anything I tell you to do." As you probably expect, he and I disagree on this point as well. Administrative road blocks cannot be used to obtain your identity in Nevada, and since you have the right to remain silent, on top of the fact that there is no requirement for you to do so, there is also no legitimate reason to require a window to be rolled down. When asked the question point blank, Fletcher explained that rolling down the window is so officers can detect the smell of alcohol or drugs, which sounds an awful lot like a warrantless search or an order to provide self-incriminating evidence.
"Roll down your window" is no more a lawful order than "recite the alphabet", "look into my light", "turn off your camera" or "remove your jewelry". As such, every motorist is subjected to an unlawful order, so any evidence obtained from that point was illegally obtained. Officers could work within the bounds of the law by modifying this slightly to "please roll down your window", and most people will comply with the request. But by making it an order, officers have violated the law.
