Can Officer Force ID....

samkent · Oct 16, 2013

The weather is getting cooler. We will start wearing jackets and coats.
Question:

If we are on public property and the wind blows open our jacket and exposes our gun can an officer force an ID check to verify we have a CC permit?

JustaShooter · Oct 16, 2013

From ORC 2921.29:

2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.

(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:

(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.

(2) The person witnessed any of the following:

(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;

(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;

(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;

(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one's personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.

(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.

The way I read it, the officer must have RAS that you have, are in the process of, or are about to commit a crime or have witnessed one and even then they can only require you to identify yourself by giving name, address and date of birth.

However, ORC 2923.12 says

(B) No person who has been issued a concealed handgun license shall do any of the following:

(1) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, fail to promptly inform any law enforcement officer who approaches the person after the person has been stopped that the person has been issued a concealed handgun license and that the person then is carrying a concealed handgun;

Therefore, if you are stopped for a law enforcement purpose, if you have a CHL you must notify - and if you do not, you are in violation of the statute.

So the question becomes, does glimpsing a concealed weapon give an officer RAS to stop you? I do not know the answer to that but I don't think it does unless you are in a prohibited place or other circumstances combined with the glimpse of the firearm give the officer RAS (like you suddenly turn and start heading away from the officer when you see him, you match the description of a suspect in a crime, there has been an armed robbery in the area recently, etc).

Hopefully someone with more information can post...

OC for ME · Oct 16, 2013

Of course a cop can force you to ID yourself. The lawfulness of he forcing you to ID is a different question.

davidmcbeth · Oct 16, 2013

2923.12 seems broader then RAS .... "any LE purpose"....what the heck does that mean? Anything in my book.

JustaShooter · Oct 16, 2013

davidmcbeth said:
2923.12 seems broader then RAS .... "any LE purpose"....what the heck does that mean? Anything in my book.

Not just anything - for example, if a LEO walks past you on the sidewalk and nods his head or asks what time it is, that's not a law enforcement purpose and you don't have to notify. But it is certainly broader than RAS. For example, if you go through a sobriety checkpoint or similar, you have to notify - you don't have to answer any questions but you do have to notify because that is being stopped for a law enforcement purpose. In fact, it is a favorite method for new CHL holders to use to get the "first notify jitters" out of the way.

Edited to add: This only applies if you are carrying concealed and have a CHL. If you have a CHL and are carrying openly, no need to notify (except when in a motor vehicle, if the firearm is loaded).

eye95 · Oct 16, 2013

davidmcbeth said:
2923.12 seems broader then RAS .... "any LE purpose"....what the heck does that mean? Anything in my book.

Who cares what your book says? You don't know spit about Ohio law.

eye95 · Oct 16, 2013

A "legitimate law enforcement purpose" would not include a stop because a gun was flashed. That does not constitute RAS. So, if it is not a Terry Stop, requiring RAS, what kind of stop is it? Are you a witness to a crime being interviewed as to what was witnessed?

Bottom line: You can't know, until a judge says one way or the other, whether you have been stopped for a "legitimate law enforcement purpose." So, if you are concealing, show your license. If you feel the cop was out of line, file a complaint later or file a lawsuit. If you do not show your CHL, and the judge says that the stop was legit, you are in trouble.

However, I recommend carrying openly and sterile. That's how I handled keeping a cop's hands off my license during a rogue stop. During my first encounter at Eastdale Mall, I did not know about carrying sterile, and was forced to give the officer my license. During my second encounter, my CPL and my DL were in my car. If the officers had demanded either of them, I would have simply stared blankly at them.

Chuck! · Oct 16, 2013

If a cop happens to spot you concealing a hand gun, I'd say any judge you come before will agree he has RAS to stop and question you.
The suspected crime would be CCW, and I can't imagine any judge saying the cop had shouldn't have stopped you.

Carrying openly, however, takes that away from them

Citizen · Oct 16, 2013

Chuck! said:
If a cop happens to spot you concealing a hand gun, I'd say any judge you come before will agree he has RAS to stop and question you.
The suspected crime would be CCW, and I can't imagine any judge saying the cop had shouldn't have stopped you.

+1

The suspected offense will be carrying a concealed gun without a CHL.

papa bear · Oct 16, 2013

OC for ME said:
Of course a cop can force you to ID yourself. The lawfulness of he forcing you to ID is a different question.

no she can not force you to ID. she can arrest you, but they would have to come up with a charge to do it with. of course in today's society that can be a number of faux laws that are on the books.

BB62 · Oct 16, 2013

Citizen said:
+1

The suspected offense will be carrying a concealed gun without a CHL.

And why would he suspect that?

Citizen · Oct 16, 2013

BB62 said:
And why would he suspect that?

You mean besides the fact that Ohio is the state that gave us Terry v Ohio, where Terry was convicted of carrying a concealed handgun?

Yeah, I know. The law may have changed, but you get my point. CC is an offense in most states. Permits grant an exception to the offense. Depends exactly on how the statute is written. If there is a statute that says CC is illegal, then the courts are gonna say the cop was legally justified to suspect the offense.

Separately, if the CCW statute says you have to have the permit on you at all times, and must show it upon LEO demand, the cop can just demand the permit. Its not a Terry Stop, its a license check. Same difference on whether its voluntary--it won't be.

BB62 · Oct 16, 2013

Citizen said:
You mean besides the fact that Ohio is the state that gave us Terry v Ohio, where Terry was convicted of carrying a concealed handgun?...

Lots of words, but you didn't answer my question.

WHY would he suspect that the person was carrying a concealed gun without a CHL? A court may uphold his actions, but to insist that he has reason to think that one is carrying without a license is baloney. (or bologna, if you prefer)

Citizen · Oct 16, 2013

BB62 said:
Lots of words, but you didn't answer my question.

WHY would he suspect that the person was carrying a concealed gun without a CHL? A court may uphold his actions, but to insist that he has reason to think that one is carrying without a license is baloney. (or bologna, if you prefer)

Oh, I see your little semantics game. OK. My fault for including the words without a CHL.

Revised: The suspected offense would be carrying a concealed gun.

BB62 · Oct 17, 2013

Citizen said:
Oh, I see your little semantics game. OK. My fault for including the words without a CHL.

Revised: The suspected offense would be carrying a concealed gun.

"Semantics"?

You know better than most that the law is about "semantics".

eye95 · Oct 17, 2013

Chuck! said:
If a cop happens to spot you concealing a hand gun, I'd say any judge you come before will agree he has RAS to stop and question you.
The suspected crime would be CCW, and I can't imagine any judge saying the cop had shouldn't have stopped you.

Carrying openly, however, takes that away from them

It depends on how the law is worded. If the crime is carrying concealed and the license is a defense, then, yes, detecting CC is RAS. If the crime is CC without a license, then, no, spotting the firearm, without reason to believe that the carrier does not have a license, is not RAS.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

marshaul · Oct 17, 2013

Can Officer point a Glock in your face?

OC for ME · Oct 17, 2013

Unlawful use of weapons--exceptions--penalties.

571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:

(1) Carries concealed upon or about his or her person a knife, a firearm, a blackjack or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use; or

3. Subdivisions (1), ... Subdivision (1) of subsection 1 of this section does not apply to any person twenty-one years of age or older or eighteen years of age or older and a member of the United States Armed Forces, or honorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces, transporting a concealable firearm in the passenger compartment of a motor vehicle, so long as such concealable firearm is otherwise lawfully possessed, nor when the actor is also in possession of an exposed firearm or projectile weapon for the lawful pursuit of game, or is in his or her dwelling unit or upon premises over which the actor has possession, authority or control, or is traveling in a continuous journey peaceably through this state. Subdivision (10) ...

4. Subdivisions (1), (8), and (10) of subsection 1 of this section shall not apply to any person who has a valid concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 or a valid permit or endorsement to carry concealed firearms issued by another state or political subdivision of another state.

Is there a difference between the bold and the term "is a defense against...?"

Some seem to think that there is not. I think there is because some states use the term "defense against."

OC for ME · Oct 17, 2013

marshaul said:
Can Officer point a Glock in your face?

Of course a cop can point a Glock in your face. The lawfulness of he pointing a Glock in your face is a different question.

marshaul · Oct 17, 2013

OC for ME said:
Of course a cop can point a Glock in your face. The lawfulness of he pointing a Glock in your face is a different question.

The question posed was "can officer force...". Not "may officer force", or "can officer legally compel".

Can Officer Force ID....

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Founder's Club Member

Accomplished Advocate

Founder's Club Member

Accomplished Advocate

Well-known member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran