State v. Kent, 15 A.3d 1286

Kent challenged the OUI roadblock stop as an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment; the suppression motion was denied and a judgment of conviction followed.
The roadblock occurred December 11–12, 2009 in Auburn with cooperation among the Auburn Police Department, Lewiston Police Department, and the Androscoggin County Sheriff’s Department; written SOPs governed the operation.
SOPs required Chief approval for sobriety checkpoints, a designated location with safety/efficiency considerations, 24-hour public notice, at least one supervisor and six patrolmen, and stopping all vehicles unless backed-up traffic created a hazard.
Sergeant Bryant identified diverted drivers and performed initial checks; he lacked full knowledge of other officers’ actions and did not testify about the supervisor’s presence or adherence to SOPs.
Kent was diverted to Bryant at the checkpoint; odor of alcohol, eye indicators, and field sobriety tests led to additional testing and an Intoxilyzer result above the legal limit; she was charged with criminal OUI in January 2010.
At the suppression hearing, the court found the roadblock followed SOPs; on appeal, the State failed to prove the roadblock was planned and executed per Fourth Amendment standards, due to lack of leadership, approval, supervision, and notice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the roadblock stop was constitutionally reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.	Kent; lack of leadership/approval violated SOPs, rendering stop unreasonable.	State; SOPs were sufficiently followed or not proven otherwise, making stop reasonable.	No; State failed to prove compliance with SOPs and proper planning, rendering the stop unconstitutional.
Whether there was adequate supervision and authorization for the roadblock.	Kent; absence of supervisor/approval undermines reasonableness.	State; implied conformity to routine practice without explicit testimony to supervision.	Insufficient evidence of supervision/approval; error in denial of suppression.
Whether the duration of detentions at the roadblock was unconstitutionally intrusive.	Detentions averaged 3–5 minutes, exceeding minimal intrusion.	Detentions within ranges seen in other roadblocks; acceptable given permit conditions.	The duration contributed to unreasonable seizure absent proper SOP adherence.

State v. Sylvain, 814 A.2d 984 (Me. 2003) (burden on State to show reasonable roadblock stop under Fourth Amendment)
State v. Patterson, 582 A.2d 1204 (Me. 1990) (limits on discretion and need for accountability in roadblocks)
State v. Bjorkaryd-Bradbury, 792 A.2d 1082 (Me. 2002) (roadblock duration and discretion considerations in reasonableness)
State v. Leighton, 551 A.2d 116 (Me. 1988) (public safety interest tempered by Fourth Amendment protections)
State v. Cloukey, 486 A.2d 143 (Me. 1985) (factors for assessing roadblock reasonableness)