• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

More legal ammunition

P

Phssthpok

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
1,026
Location
, ,
imported post

Over on another forum I've been discussing a recent account of a man in Ohio arrested for refusing to hand over his DL. (OCDO topic here)

In doing some searching to debate one of the more articulate members, I stumbled across this little Gem of a PDF From the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Division.

For those that like to OC sans 'papers', and bearing only a BORSE, as I do, this is good news.:celebrate


As an aside, it's going to be out to B-fast, harbor freight, winco (again) and the auto parts store for me this morning...I'll report back later!
 
John Hardin

John Hardin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
683
Location
Snohomish, Washington, USA
imported post

Because Washington State does not have a stop-and-identify statute like Nevada’s statute requiring identification during Terry stops, we think that Washington officers lack statutory authority to arrest for “obstructing” or for any other current Washington crime in this circumstance. Washington officers are, however, free to ask suspects in Terry stops to identify themselves or to show ID documents, and also may do so when conversing with pedestrians during non-Terry “citizen-contacts” (however, as to requesting ID from non-violator MV passengers, see the Washington Supreme Court’s Rankin decision digested below in this month’s LED at 7-13).
Click to expand...
Note, however, that under 46.61.020 and 46.64.070 you are required to produce ID on demand when operating a motor vehicle, and under 9.41.050 you are required to produce your CPL on demand (probably only if you are carrying, though).

The "non-violator MV passengers" comment refers to situations like: the operator has a learner's permit, so the officer can demand ID from the other passengers to verify that at least one has a valid DL, and the minimum age requirements aren't being violated, and so forth.

As a research resource for others:

https://fortress.wa.gov/cjtc/www/led/ledpage.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top