Sent from my M865 using Tapatalk
Thread: LEO in AZ
I talkedwith a LEO lastnight and he said if I don't have id its off to jail .
my ? I thought you dident have to have I'd?
why do I see people who say they don't need id?
Sent from my M865 using Tapatalk
OP, under what circumstances would the officer be requesting your ID? Were you driving or walking? Were you being detained? The circumstances make a big difference in deciding whether ID must be produced.
Last edited by thebigsd; 11-20-2011 at 02:32 PM.
"When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."
I'm sensing troll. Single digit posts. No LEO in Az is gonna say that.
A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow
Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
It is important to realize that any given cop is not a person's personal lawyer, meaning it is not the cop's job or function to give out legal interpretations or legal advice.
Hard to say. But, I know of no laws that require a person to carry identity documents on the off chance some cop somewhere wants to see them. This is not the Soviet Union, "Papers, please, comrade." If you are driving, then state law probably requires you to carry a driver's license while driving, but that is not the same as carrying a driver's license because a law requires every adult to always carry identity documents on their person....why do I see people who say they don't need id?
There is a distinction between a cop demanding identity and demanding identity documents. I am talking now about the difference between a cop demanding you tell him your name and address verbally, and a cop demanding your "ID", meaning an identity document like a driver's license or state-issued ID card. In some states, the statutes authorize a cop can demand identity from a citizen under certain circumstances, and may even penalize a refusal.
I know of at least one state statute that requires a citizen to provide an identity document to a demanding cop under certain specific circumstances if the citizen has one of the listed identity documents on his person at the time.
So, when you are reading people who say no ID is needed, they may be speaking about their state not requiring citizens to provide identity to a cop under certain circumstances. Such statutes are sometimes called "stop-and-identify" statutes. You would want to look up the statutes of the state you are concerned about and read it for yourself. One little hitch, though. If there is no such statute, then you could do a lot of reading and hunting. Thus, it doesn't hurt to ask whether such a law exists. On this forum, there is usually enough people in any given state to answer that question. And, if such a statute exists, guide you to it.
Last edited by Citizen; 11-20-2011 at 04:34 PM.
One qualifier to that: If you are not an American citizen, or if you are, but look "foreign", there are some states that will put you in jail if you do not have identity documents on you.
Unfortunately, Alabama is one of those states. There was a news story out of Tuscaloosa, Alabama about a Mercedes executive who was carted off to jail because he did not have his documents with him.
I have had to caution my wife to always have her green card with her when she leaves the house. The other Chinese that we know are very concerned about it as almost all of them know someone who is here illegally.
No, I do not know who is here legally or illegally and I am not going to ask. Even if I did, they would not tell me.
How is a cop going to determine the law is violated? Meaning, how is a cop going to determine someone is actually foreign? Just because a person looks "foreign" is becoming more and more meaningless. Twice I recently encountered teens of Hispanic and Arab descent gathered but quiet at the moment I noticed them during my approach. As I walked closer, in both cases they started talking--in flawless, unaccented English! They were no more "foreign" than me. At my local grocery store, there are multiple young adults (cashiers) of obvious Arab, Hispanic, and Asian descent. And, not a one of them has a foreign accent to his or her English.
I can't see how a cop is going to determine whether the law is violated, unless the person can't speak English or speaks it poorly or with a heavy foreign accent. If such is the case, and a green card is required by law, then I can see how a cop might be able to have probable cause for an arrest. But, otherwise I just can't see it.
Of course, one might care to avoid being the test case and just carry the required ID. This is understandable to me. But, it would seem to me such a cop would be legally actionable for arresting merely for looking foreign and not having identity documents to prove not being foreign.
It occurs to me that I'm probably hacking my way through the same questions and issues that Arizona went through with their anti-immigrant law last year.
no sir not a troll
was getting infomation
yes I was told that by a LEo that in az you must have I'D it also depends on the siutation . Iwas at a hocky game and asked him,
sorry about speling my phone is lame
this wasn't too hard to find:
Pretty simple if statement. If you are being detained, then you must identify yourself by stating your "true full name". If you are not being detained, then there is no such requirement. By the way you phrased the OP you are suggesting the LEO said you must carry a physical form of identification. That is not true, unless you're performing a licensed activity, e.g. driving.13-2412. Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classification
A. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person's refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person's true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.
B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.
Good find, DarkShadow.
Notice the statute requires only verbal identity.
Too bad its next to impossible to figure out whether the cop has genuine reasonable suspicion. Essentially, a fella has to assume the cop has genuine reasonable suspicion, or risk a citation for a class 2 misdemeanor. I'm betting that's 6 months to a year in jail and/or up to a $2500 fine. Pretty steep price for guessing wrong about whether the cop has genuine reasonable suspicion, meaning guessing wrong about whether the judge will say the cop had genuine reasonable suspicion.
"Well, gee golly, Officer Friendly, I'll carry my state issued identification everywhere I go.... as soon as the state issues one to me. What? Driver's license? Well sure I have one, but I'm not driving now, am I?
You want to see it? Well sure, c'mon, let's go take a look at it? I'm sure I parked somewhere around here; you got comfy shoes? packed a lunch? Okay, we're all set then. Gee, I hope I can remember what I drove today, I forget sometimes."
Identifying myself and having 'identification' are two separate things, still you'd think someone who was a professional would know the difference, wouldn't you?
@Citizen: Remember that I am in Alabama. While we do have some pretty intelligent law enforcement folks, we also have some that are almost a caricature of the stereotypical Southern sheriff with no more than a room-temperature IQ.
I agree that if a LEO does stop someone and states it was because they "looked foreign", it will be one heckuva lawsuit. But I will guarantee that they will find some other reason as to why they stopped the individual.
In the case of the Mercedes executive I mentioned, he apparently broke a traffic law and then, when stopped, had no driver's license on him.
If the case is that you must provide your real name if you are detained, the first question is "am I being detained?" No? Bye.
This new immigration law ain't pretty. And the first arrest was a naturalized citizen without documents, in his own home. The search warrant was for bath salts.
Last edited by Kirbinator; 11-25-2011 at 02:09 PM.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
In other news, we have had a Hyundai employee arrested as well.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.