Concealed Carry Arrest

imported post

Here in Virginia, I found out the hard way that it's a court of lawyers, not of law.

I tried to get a change in custody of my daughter and tried to represent myself. The judge would not let me ask my daughter's mother any questions whatsoever and would not allow me to view the child study report. He said that if I had an attorney then he could see it but I could not. In a matter of minutes I withdrew my motion and went home.

I decided not to pursue the matter any further for fear of blacklisting myself for any future attempts.

imported post

Blinn,

get the best aggressive attorney you can find. Sue the Sh$# out of them. If (sorry, have to say that) your story is true it's a solid case. Go after the D.A., the arresting officer (only protected when he follows the law and policy) and department.
sue for the year without the gun, sue for unlawful arrest, sue for them squashing your hopes of even becoming LEO. Sue sue sue.

you have a solid case. Best of luck to you!

imported post

That's why there is an appeals process...

imported post

This may not help now, and may just make you a bit angry, but I'm pretty sure you didn't have to give the officer your CHL when he asked for your ID's. It's my understanding that you only have to present it when an officer pulls you over for speeding and you have to inform him that you have a gun on you (and other similar situations where you've supposedly broken some kind of law). But when a cop just asks for your ID just cuz he's curious about who you are and what you're doing, you do not even have to mention a gun or a CHL. If you hadn't given him it, he never would have known squat. If someone is to correct me on this, please reference the specific part of the penal code, cuz I've read it several times and that's how I understand it.

imported post

The cop DOES know, doesn't he/she? I mean, doesn't a CHL come up when the cop runs a person'sdriver's license number?

-- John D.

imported post

I suppose you're right. Really, a lot of crap probably comes up, including you're mother's maiden name, your girlfriend's hair color, your dog's name, etc.

But, in his situation, did he even have to give the cop his ID at all? They hadn't done anything wrong in the first place. He had not pulled them over for speeding, or smelled alcohol on their breath, so what is his justification for ID'ing them? Does anyone know Texas law on this?

imported post

No, I don't.

As for what the cops ask for and whether or not to give it to them, I really don't know where to draw the line. Also, I know I am not going to win any "argument" with them some lonely night on some highway anyway, even if LATER it is found they were out of line atthe traffic stop...for whaever reason they stopped me.

-- John D.

imported post

jarodm20 wrote:

I suppose you're right. Really, a lot of crap probably comes up, including you're mother's maiden name, your girlfriend's hair color, your dog's name, etc.

But, in his situation, did he even have to give the cop his ID at all? They hadn't done anything wrong in the first place. He had not pulled them over for speeding, or smelled alcohol on their breath, so what is his justification for ID'ing them? Does anyone know Texas law on this?

Click to expand...

It is my understanding per a long past SC ruling that you must provide identification when ordered to do so by a LEO.

imported post

NativeTexan wrote:

jarodm20 wrote:

I suppose you're right. Really, a lot of crap probably comes up, including you're mother's maiden name, your girlfriend's hair color, your dog's name, etc.

But, in his situation, did he even have to give the cop his ID at all? They hadn't done anything wrong in the first place. He had not pulled them over for speeding, or smelled alcohol on their breath, so what is his justification for ID'ing them? Does anyone know Texas law on this?

Click to expand...

It is my understanding per a long past SC ruling that you must provide identification when ordered to do so by a LEO.

Click to expand...

I think you have to give your name and nothing more. Dave Ridley harassed by cops for open carrying in New Hampshire, refuses to give a driver's license:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWXnK5UyRI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewhampshireunderground%2Ecom%2Fforum%2Findex%2Ephp%3Ftopic%3D10019%2E45


But, Texas law may be different from NH.

imported post

Nevermind.You do have to give them both your driver's license and your handgun license.They'll suspend your license if you refuse.Texas GC411.205.

imported post

jarodm20 wrote:

NativeTexan wrote:

jarodm20 wrote:

I suppose you're right. Really, a lot of crap probably comes up, including you're mother's maiden name, your girlfriend's hair color, your dog's name, etc.

But, in his situation, did he even have to give the cop his ID at all? They hadn't done anything wrong in the first place. He had not pulled them over for speeding, or smelled alcohol on their breath, so what is his justification for ID'ing them? Does anyone know Texas law on this?

Click to expand...

It is my understanding per a long past SC ruling that you must provide identification when ordered to do so by a LEO.

Click to expand...

I think you have to give your name and nothing more. Dave Ridley harassed by cops for open carrying in New Hampshire, refuses to give a driver's license:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWXnK5UyRI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewhampshireunderground%2Ecom%2Fforum%2Findex%2Ephp%3Ftopic%3D10019%2E45


But, Texas law may be different from NH.

Click to expand...

See: HIIBEL v. SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF NEVADA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, ET AL. for a .PDF of the acftual SCOTUS ruling stemming from a caseout ofNevada in 2003-2004 on the subject of stop and identify. There is SCOTUS history prior to this last date but this is the most recentcitethat I'm aware of.

For ageneral explanation see news item: Court: If police ask, you must give your name

Essentially if you refuse to identify yourself to a LEO when asked to do so you can be criminally charged.

imported post

NativeTexan wrote:

jarodm20 wrote:

NativeTexan wrote:

jarodm20 wrote:

I suppose you're right. Really, a lot of crap probably comes up, including you're mother's maiden name, your girlfriend's hair color, your dog's name, etc.

But, in his situation, did he even have to give the cop his ID at all? They hadn't done anything wrong in the first place. He had not pulled them over for speeding, or smelled alcohol on their breath, so what is his justification for ID'ing them? Does anyone know Texas law on this?

Click to expand...

It is my understanding per a long past SC ruling that you must provide identification when ordered to do so by a LEO.

Click to expand...

I think you have to give your name and nothing more. Dave Ridley harassed by cops for open carrying in New Hampshire, refuses to give a driver's license:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWXnK5UyRI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewhampshireunderground%2Ecom%2Fforum%2Findex%2Ephp%3Ftopic%3D10019%2E45


But, Texas law may be different from NH.

Click to expand...

See: HIIBEL v. SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF NEVADA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, ET AL. for a .PDF of the acftual SCOTUS ruling stemming from a caseout ofNevada in 2003-2004 on the subject of stop and identify. There is SCOTUS history prior to this last date but this is the most recentcitethat I'm aware of.

For ageneral explanation see news item: Court: If police ask, you must give your name

Essentially if you refuse to identify yourself to a LEO when asked to do so you can be criminally charged.

Click to expand...

Bull-puckey.

At least not at the federal level.

What the SCOTUS held was that STATE LEVEL 'stop-and-identify' statutes were constitutional, but they must be NARROWLY DEFINED. In a state that does not have such a narrowly defined S&I statute (such as Washington) No criminal charges may be brought absent a qualified (RAS) 'Terry stop' (as I proved back in November).

Check your own state for applicability...IANAL.