DUI sting for the stung?

found on: http://criminal.lawyers.com/traffic-violations/... Roadblocks or sobriety checkpoints are permitted under the Fourth Amendment so long as they are conducted in a neutral or non-arbitrary manner, their intrusion on motorists is limited, and they further an important governmental or public purpose. There is no requirement that an officer have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify a stop at a roadblock. Factors that determine whether a roadblock is neutral and does not overly intrude on motorists include whether: Supervisory personnel or field officers make the decision to set up a roadblock The roadblock is conducted according to neutral plans or guidelines Cars are stopped randomly or are selected at the discretion of officers The roadblock causes an unreasonable delay to motorists The roadblock is clearly marked as a checkpoint Officers conducting the checkpoint are properly trained and experienced Advance notice is given to the public Safe conditions are maintained Roadblocks have been found to further a governmental interest in the following instances: Catching and deterring drunk driving **Checking for vehicle or license registration** Addressing highway safety concerns, such as seatbelt law enforcement Policing the border Acquiring information on a recent violent crime in the area A roadblock is not justified to obtain evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing or of drug crimes. Some state constitutions prohibit roadblocks and require officers to have an individualized suspicion to justify a vehicle stop.
— April 22, 2014 11:29 a.m.