Obligation to present Identification

[Just_plinking]

I'm not trying to bait any arguments, I just have a simple question I couldn't find the answer to.

If a person were to be pulled over for speeding, does a passenger in the car have any legal obligation to present their drivers license?

Disclaimer:

This question is not the result of any personal experience or altercation.

edit: the state is Georgia if that matters.

[Hack]

I'm not trying to bait any arguments, I just have a simple question I couldn't find the answer to.

If a person were to be pulled over for speeding, does a passenger in the car have any legal obligation to present their drivers license?

Disclaimer:

This question is not the result of any personal experience or altercation.

edit: the state is Georgia if that matters.

Have you looked in Georgia state law on the subject?

[Sam Spade]

In AZ, the answer is "probably not". This is *not* the same as the passenger having to identify himself---i.e., provide his truthfull name. I'll bet dollars to donuts that's true in GA, too. He's not engaged in any licensed activity, so the state has no claim on his license. And no state in the union requires someone to carry, much less to present ID on a routine basis like that.

[scottydl]

Georgia's Traffic Laws:

http://dps.georgia.gov/00/channel_title/0,2094,5635600_164100933,00.html

Have fun!

[collim1]

Normal traffic stop, say driver was speeding, the answer is no. The officer can request the passenger's license, but he does not have to comply.

Now, if the vehicle was reported being involved in a crime then yes. If the officer is stopping the vehicle because he can articulate that it was involved in suspicious activity then yes. If the vehicle smells like marijuana, or if contraband is found in the vehicle then yes.

In my state the passenger can be issued a citation for not wearing his seatbelt, so in that case yes as well.

I dont often ask for passengers ID on a routine traffic violation stop, but I will if something seems hinky about him. Only 1 in 500 times has the passenger refused to give the ID, even when they ended up having warrants.

[Just_plinking]

Normal traffic stop, say driver was speeding, the answer is no. The officer can request the passenger's license, but he does not have to comply.

Now, if the vehicle was reported being involved in a crime then yes. If the officer is stopping the vehicle because he can articulate that it was involved in suspicious activity then yes. If the vehicle smells like marijuana, or if contraband is found in the vehicle then yes.

In my state the passenger can be issued a citation for not wearing his seatbelt, so in that case yes as well.

I dont often ask for passengers ID on a routine traffic violation stop, but I will if something seems hinky about him. Only 1 in 500 times has the passenger refused to give the ID, even when they ended up having warrants.

Thanks a lot for answering my question. Just like everyone, I thought I knew, but I realized I could be wrong.

[scottydl]

Case law constantly changes on these kinds of issues too, so there is rarely a stock answer that will stand forevermore.

For awhile in Illinois (from maybe '03-'05?), a police officer was not allowed to even speak to a driver during the stop about anything except the traffic infraction. Talk about cutting us off at the knees! Luckily that was overturned after a couple years.

Cases like Arizona v. Gant (related to vehicle searches) come along every so often and change traffic stop procedures for us in other ways as well.

[Ohio Copper]

As a matter of protocol here, I ID every adult in the vehicle.

Because passengers present a risk to officer safety equal to the risk presented by the driver, an officer may ask for identification from passengers and run background checks on them as well. - United States v. Rice, 483 F.3d 1079 (10th Cir. 2007)


I've picked up quite a few warrants from passengers of vehicles.

[ateamer]

Short answer, it depends. Long answer, yes, but...

[GRIMLET]

Wasn't there something in the Patriot Act which allows an officer to require identification?

[DaBigBR]

Wasn't there something in the Patriot Act which allows an officer to require identification?

That requires a person to carry a physical identification card? That requires a person to identify themselves to an officer? Even if that were the case, what recourse or "authority" would it give you average beat cop if a person refused?

[RenegadeGlocker]

I'm not trying to bait any arguments, I just have a simple question I couldn't find the answer to.

If a person were to be pulled over for speeding, does a passenger in the car have any legal obligation to present their drivers license?

Disclaimer:

This question is not the result of any personal experience or altercation.

edit: the state is Georgia if that matters.

Depends yupon what state you are in:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes

[Sam Spade]

Depends yupon what state you are in:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes

Negative. You've confused "stop and identify" with "present ID".

A number of states have laws which require you to identify yourself when lawfully detained. None whatsoever have laws requiring you to present ID when not engaged in some licensed activity. The .gov can not require you to obtain an ID card; how then can they require you to present one?

This is one of those areas where precise wording matters. The OP asked about a non-operator's "legal obligation to present their drivers license". As I said, he doesn't even have a legal obligation to possess a driver's license.

[RenegadeGlocker]

Negative. You've confused "stop and identify" with "present ID".

A number of states have laws which require you to identify yourself when lawfully detained. None whatsoever have laws requiring you to present ID when not engaged in some licensed activity. The .gov can not require you to obtain an ID card; how then can they require you to present one?

This is one of those areas where precise wording matters. The OP asked about a non-operator's "legal obligation to present their drivers license". As I said, he doesn't even have a legal obligation to possess a driver's license.

Correct, I answered based on [generic] thread Title.

[GRIMLET]

That requires a person to carry a physical identification card? That requires a person to identify themselves to an officer? Even if that were the case, what recourse or "authority" would it give you average beat cop if a person refused?

Not an id card but identify themselves. I can't pull it up but it seems I have heard this before. I could be wrong, very wrong. Any members well versed on the Patriot Act?

[DaBigBR]

Not an id card but identify themselves. I can't pull it up but it seems I have heard this before. I could be wrong, very wrong. Any members well versed on the Patriot Act?

I guess my point remains...IF such a thing is required and "you", as a local police officer, demand that a person and they identify themselves and they refuse, what legal recourse does such a provision give you? Absent an applicable local or state statute (which is not what we're talking about here), how do I write a "Patriot Act" charge? (somewhat tongue in cheek there)

[GRIMLET]

No harm. I'm not sure. Its one of those things I remember after 9-11.
If it was in there, I would have to see how it was written.

Ok ok ok. Now I have to do some research and try to find it.
IF and only IF it were there, a person who refused would be in disorderly conduct, failure to obey a lawful order. At least in my state. IF and only IF I can find it. Give me time. Or please, someone knowing of the Patriot Act confirm or correct me.

[GRIMLET]

Ok, so far, I am at a loss to my memory. Hiibel vs Nevada and the banking id rules in the Patriot Act are all I can find. Neither do my memory justice.
Until I can quote a statute by number, please excuse me. Thanks.

[whatsupglock]

In Ohio, an officer can ask anyone at any time to produce identification. It does not have to be a driver's license. If the person fails to provide or refuses to provide identification they may be retained/detained until positive identification is made. No PC is needed for an I.D. check.

[S&WM&PAR15T&G34]

In Ohio, an officer can ask anyone at any time to produce identification. It does not have to be a driver's license. If the person fails to provide or refuses to provide identification they may be retained/detained until positive identification is made. No PC is needed for an I.D. check.


Sounds a lot like Nazi Germany " Papers Please "

[lopak]

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&issue_id=42007&category_ID=3

Good read.

Punch line:
"According to the Supreme Court, the police may arrest for failure to identify if state law criminalizes such behavior."

Otherwise, it depends on context.

[DaBigBR]

In Ohio, an officer can ask anyone at any time to produce identification. It does not have to be a driver's license. If the person fails to provide or refuses to provide identification they may be retained/detained until positive identification is made. No PC is needed for an I.D. check.

Are you trying to submit that:


An officer may approach any person at any time and request identification without any legal basis to stop them?
Upon being stopped, a person must produce some form of identification, rather than simply tell the officer who they are?
That failure to produce said identification document allows the officer to detain the person indefinitely until such a document can be produced?


...because if you are, you're wrong.

The legal standard for an investigatory stop, be it of a person walking down the street, riding a bicycle, driving a vehicle, etc, is reasonable, articulable suspicion as established in Terry v. Ohio. Furthermore, the government cannot require a person to obtain a government identification, nor can it require them to carry or have said document available unless the person is engaged in an activity which requires a license, such as driving a car, carrying a gun, etc.

EDIT TO ADD
I'm not saying that an officer could not consensually contact somebody and ask for identification. ANYBODY can do that.

[scottydl]

Illinois has "Obstructing Identification" on the books now, a new component of the Resisting/Obstructing A Peace Officer statute. It requires a person to identify themselves, but only in these conditions:

A lawful arrest.
A lawful detention (which includes a traffic stop).
Questioning of a witness to a crime.

Works pretty well in many situations when we get the "F--- You!" response while trying to get business done. It might apply to a vehicle passenger in a traffic stop, but that would be shaky and I'd think the officer would still have to articulate something extra if arresting a passenger for refusing to provide ID.

[Ohio Copper]

Are you trying to submit that:


An officer may approach any person at any time and request identification without any legal basis to stop them?
Upon being stopped, a person must produce some form of identification, rather than simply tell the officer who they are?
That failure to produce said identification document allows the officer to detain the person indefinitely until such a document can be produced?


...because if you are, you're wrong.

The legal standard for an investigatory stop, be it of a person walking down the street, riding a bicycle, driving a vehicle, etc, is reasonable, articulable suspicion as established in Terry v. Ohio. Furthermore, the government cannot require a person to obtain a government identification, nor can it require them to carry or have said document available unless the person is engaged in an activity which requires a license, such as driving a car, carrying a gun, etc.

EDIT TO ADD
I'm not saying that an officer could not consensually contact somebody and ask for identification. ANYBODY can do that.



Name and DOB will suffice in the great state of Ohio. Granted, we aren't stopping and chatting up the lady walking her dog through the apartment complex. We're stopping folks that raise our eyebrows just enough, reasonable suspicion and all that.

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.

You can articulate via various calls in the area they're found in. No law against us stopping and chatting anybody up on we find on a public roadway.

There's also obstructing justice, but the above fits this discussion. We get a lot of calls about people out walking etc. late at night and we check them out.

[4949shooter]

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.



Okay, this sums it up. By Ohio law, the vehicle must have been stopped for suspected criminal activity for a passenger to be commanded to produce their identification. It's no different than Terry vs. Ohio, as BigBR pointed out. It's also no different than NJ.

We can command ID from a passenger not wearing a seatbelt, or where there is suspected criminal activity, such as the odor of marijuana.

If the driver of the vehicle is stopped for a motor vehicle violation, say speeding, we cannot command identification from the passengers, absent other factors as mentioned above. We can ask the passengers for ID, but they can refuse.

So, criminal stop or suspected criminal activity: Yes.

Passenger not wearing a seat belt: Yes.

Motor vehicle violation stop: No (absent other factors).

[bug]

Can a Persons Refusal to show ID be used As PC to make them show you?

Meaning if the person refusing to show becomes agitated or some other emotion at the request, that would show he/she is hiding something, can that then be used to establish PC and then make them show ID?

probably a stupid question? but I honestly don't know.

[4949shooter]

Can a Persons Refusal to show ID be used As PC to make them show you?

Meaning if the person refusing to show becomes agitated or some other emotion at the request, that would show he/she is hiding something, can that then be used to establish PC and then make them show ID?

probably a stupid question? but I honestly don't know.

No, not if the police never had a reason to command ID in the first place.

This may arouse the suspicions of the officer though. "Why isn't he / she showing ID? Do they have a warrant?"

Legally though the answer is no.

[scottydl]

No, not if the police never had a reason to command ID in the first place.

This may arouse the suspicions of the officer though. "Why isn't he / she showing ID? Do they have a warrant?"

Legally though the answer is no.

Agreed, the only reason the failure to show ID is illegal is in the context of some other criminal investigation. So if there is nothing else going on EXCEPT the failure to willingly provide ID, then that alone is not a crime.

But quite honestly, it's extremely rare for a police officer to walk up to someone random on the street and ask for ID for no reason. There is almost always something going on to prompt an officer to ID someone. And that person (the one being ID'd) may not always be privy to the information the police officer has, so it may appear to them that they are being "stopped for no reason" when that's not really the case.

[Ohio Copper]

Okay, this sums it up. By Ohio law, the vehicle must have been stopped for suspected criminal activity for a passenger to be commanded to produce their identification. It's no different than Terry vs. Ohio, as BigBR pointed out. It's also no different than NJ.

We can command ID from a passenger not wearing a seatbelt, or where there is suspected criminal activity, such as the odor of marijuana.

If the driver of the vehicle is stopped for a motor vehicle violation, say speeding, we cannot command identification from the passengers, absent other factors as mentioned above. We can ask the passengers for ID, but they can refuse.

So, criminal stop or suspected criminal activity: Yes.

Passenger not wearing a seat belt: Yes.

Motor vehicle violation stop: No (absent other factors).

Police can request passengers in motor vehicles to provide identifying information, if the vehicle has been lawfully stopped. - State v. Griffith

So long as it does not unreasonably extend the length of the stop and the inherent danger by passengers on a traffic stop, officers may ask for ID from passengers on a lawful stop, even on motor vehicle violation stops. Ive don't it countless times, including cars I've stopped for speeding.

[DaBigBR]

Name and DOB will suffice in the great state of Ohio. Granted, we aren't stopping and chatting up the lady walking her dog through the apartment complex. We're stopping folks that raise our eyebrows just enough, reasonable suspicion and all that.

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.

You can articulate via various calls in the area they're found in. No law against us stopping and chatting anybody up on we find on a public roadway.

There's also obstructing justice, but the above fits this discussion. We get a lot of calls about people out walking etc. late at night and we check them out.

My point is the same as Sam's earlier in the thread, the exact phrasing of the situation is important. I'm not suggesting at all that a law enforcement officer who has LAWFULLY STOPPED a person can compel them to identify themselves and then arrest them if they fail to do so. The post I was replying to presented an overbroad scenario.

Can a Persons Refusal to show ID be used As PC to make them show you?

Meaning if the person refusing to show becomes agitated or some other emotion at the request, that would show he/she is hiding something, can that then be used to establish PC and then make them show ID?

probably a stupid question? but I honestly don't know.

I'm somewhat confused by your question. What do you mean by "PC to make them show you?" Assuming that there is a LAWFUL STOP and the person REFUSES to identify, the odds are that they will be ARRESTED and CHARGED for refusing to do so."

Police can request passengers in motor vehicles to provide identifying information, if the vehicle has been lawfully stopped. - State v. Griffith

So long as it does not unreasonably extend the length of the stop and the inherent danger by passengers on a traffic stop, officers may ask for ID from passengers on a lawful stop, even on motor vehicle violation stops. Ive don't it countless times, including cars I've stopped for speeding.

I've found that when a passenger refuses to identify themselves, they also usually refuse to exit the car... ;)

[Kahr_Glockman]

Brown V. Texas shows that just failing to identify is not a crime in and of itself. SCOTUS found that in order to file a Failure to ID the subject has to be a suspect in a crime. So failing to ID on a traffic stop in which you are a passenger is a no go. The driver all day long but the passengers, not so much

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/443/47/case.html?vm=r

[Ohio Copper]

Brown V. Texas shows that just failing to identify is not a crime in and of itself. SCOTUS found that in order to file a Failure to ID the subject has to be a suspect in a crime. So failing to ID on a traffic stop in which you are a passenger is a no go. The driver all day long but the passengers, not so much

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/443/47/case.html?vm=r


I'll argue that all day long. A lawful traffic stop and a stop on an individual walking down the street are two different things. Like I said, they've already ruled because of the inherent danger by passengers on a lawful traffic stop, officers can request ID.

[CJStudent]

I'll argue that all day long. A lawful traffic stop and a stop on an individual walking down the street are two different things. Like I said, they've already ruled because of the inherent danger by passengers on a lawful traffic stop, officers can request ID.

A link to said ruling? I'm not doubting you; I'm just interested to see the reference.

[Ohio Copper]

US v. Rice, State v. Griffith and US v. Fernandez are the ones I was taught and utilize. I'm sure there may be others. Remember that those are for traffic stops and not terry stops on pedestrians.

[bug]

I'm somewhat confused by your question. What do you mean by "PC to make them show you?" Assuming that there is a LAWFUL STOP and the person REFUSES to identify, the odds are that they will be ARRESTED and CHARGED for refusing to do so."


Sorry I was trying to make sense I guess I failed.

Say you walk up to me on the street and you think I might be up to something but you just have a funny feeling and not much else to establish PC to search me, so you ask me for ID and I say NO. And I seem agitated and act strange/bad after your request, would my strange/bad reaction to your simple request then be enough to have PC and demand ID?

[samurairabbi]

Negative. You've confused "stop and identify" with "present ID".

A number of states have laws which require you to identify yourself when lawfully detained. None whatsoever have laws requiring you to present ID when not engaged in some licensed activity. The .gov can not require you to obtain an ID card; how then can they require you to present one?


The US Supreme Court has recently ruled that a person must give his correct name upon request to ANY validly identified law officer. The question of presentation of actual identification has not yet shown up before that court.

Here in Indianapolis, several times I have seen news footage of someone refusing to give his name to a uniformed law officer. You can see a somewhat "amused" look on the officers' faces when this happens; I think they know that the recalcitrant person has just given them proper cause for a justifiable arrest.

[GumbyDammit]

Sorry I was trying to make sense I guess I failed.

Say you walk up to me on the street and you think I might be up to something but you just have a funny feeling and not much else to establish PC to search me, so you ask me for ID and I say NO. And I seem agitated and act strange/bad after your request, would my strange/bad reaction to your simple request then be enough to have PC and demand ID?

You being agitated by the request doesn't = PC. Just as if I ask for consent to search your car on a stop and you say no, that doesn't create PC for me to do it anyway. It will make me look closer for a way in, especially if that funny feeling led me to ask in the first place.

[4949shooter]

Police can request passengers in motor vehicles to provide identifying information, if the vehicle has been lawfully stopped. - State v. Griffith

So long as it does not unreasonably extend the length of the stop and the inherent danger by passengers on a traffic stop, officers may ask for ID from passengers on a lawful stop, even on motor vehicle violation stops. Ive don't it countless times, including cars I've stopped for speeding.

Yep there is a difference between requesting identification and commanding it from a passenger who is not suspected of a crime or violation.

[Sam Spade]

For those in the thread thinking that they have the authority to demand identification (not simply "demand the identity") perhaps you can link to your statute that requires a passenger to carry identification? Or to obtain it?

How do you propose to apply a criminal sanction for not displaying what he doesn't have to have?

[Ohio Copper]

Yep there is a difference between requesting identification and commanding it from a passenger who is not suspected of a crime or violation.

When they ask "why?" I usually respond with "because I asked you". And I've never had an issue with somebody not id'ing themselves. I don't command it, I just ask for all the passengers IDs as well.

Don't want no sign

[jeffyjeff]

The US Supreme Court has recently ruled that a person must give his correct name upon request to ANY validly identified law officer.

you got some sources on that? :whistling:

[Just_plinking]

Yep there is a difference between requesting identification and commanding it from a passenger who is not suspected of a crime or violation.

Exactly, I personally feel the difference is big. I honestly didn't expect this thread to become a debate, but it appears this issue isn't as simple as one might think it ought to be. Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this issue.

For the record, the hypothetical scenario which prompted my question involves a man being pulled over, and his wife being ordered to present her driver's license. I don't have a bad attitude, but I guess I'm a little protective of my girl. I never expect this hypothetical to become pertinent to my life, but I just wanted to know what the law was.

And also for the record, I'm certainly pro police. She's A diminutive little accountant with glasses who has probably never crossed the street without a crosswalk. If you don't like my opinion of the issue, I urge you to try to look at it from my perspective. (and yes, if politely requested she'd gladly give it, and as a rule I never speed so it isn't a problem, and I don't stay up nights worrying about this-flame on if it makes you feel good :cool:). Either way, thanks for the work you do and your replies.

[x_out86]

Little late arriving, but I figured as might as well jump on the band wagon.

We were told at training by our assistant attorney general that as far as requiring ID from a passenger the simple answer is no. However, if they are violating a law such as seatbelt, open intoxicants, etc, then yes; or if the vehicle is being stopped as part of an investigation/complaint then most likely yes as well.

As already been said, if you dont have legal justification for requiring them to ID themselves, you cant force the issue if they bawk at your request.

[ottomatic]

Where it gets interesting is: If the person (passenger) who is NOT being suspected of any illegal activity, has no form of ID on him/her and the information presented comes back totally negative. That person then claims to have never been issued a state ID/DL. Now what? You can suspect that they are lying about who they are, but how can you prove it? Happens to me all the time.

[DaBigBR]

Where it gets interesting is: If the person (passenger) who is NOT being suspected of any illegal activity, has no form of ID on him/her and the information presented comes back totally negative. That person then claims to have never been issued a state ID/DL. Now what? You can suspect that they are lying about who they are, but how can you prove it? Happens to me all the time.

I usually try criminal history next, since AKAs are in there. Obviously that doesn't always work out, but it's worth a shot.

[KingWalleye]

Illinois has "Obstructing Identification" on the books now, a new component of the Resisting/Obstructing A Peace Officer statute. It requires a person to identify themselves, but only in these conditions:

A lawful arrest.
A lawful detention (which includes a traffic stop).
Questioning of a witness to a crime.

Works pretty well in many situations when we get the "F--- You!" response while trying to get business done. It might apply to a vehicle passenger in a traffic stop, but that would be shaky and I'd think the officer would still have to articulate something extra if arresting a passenger for refusing to provide ID.

Thanks for posting this. We had a discussion about this at work a few days ago. In Chicago the police often times will stop people on the street (in select neighborhoods) and demand identification on the premise that the parties being stopped "might" have outstanding warrants. Since Chicago is a "haven city" the illegal aliens are exempt.
My question to you is if a person is not carrying identification how can you know if the name and dob they give is legitamite?

[Mayhem like Me]

Thanks a lot for answering my question. Just like everyone, I thought I knew, but I realized I could be wrong.

Depends on the "totality of circumstances" if the car is pulled over under circumstances to arise suspicion that crime is "afoot"... or after Midnight and all passengers look to be minors, yes indeed you MAY have to provide ID.
But a normal stop, for a infraction the driver committed, no you cannot be forced to ID meaning Provide A picture ID,,

[scottydl]

My question to you is if a person is not carrying identification how can you know if the name and dob they give is legitamite?

Most people will have a record in some computer file somewhere, that we have access to. A driver's license in any state, a local report database, nationwide criminal history files, etc. It's all computerized. If we are checking a name/DOB and it constantly comes back "No Record" or the identifiers (height, weight, tattoos, address) match someone else, then it's usually pretty clear that the person is lying about their name. It's up to the officer and the situation on how much time they want/need to devote to finding out the truth.

[Bren]

The US Supreme Court has recently ruled that a person must give his correct name upon request to ANY validly identified law officer. The question of presentation of actual identification has not yet shown up before that court.

Here in Indianapolis, several times I have seen news footage of someone refusing to give his name to a uniformed law officer. You can see a somewhat "amused" look on the officers' faces when this happens; I think they know that the recalcitrant person has just given them proper cause for a justifiable arrest.

Not exactly.

Here's a link to a wikipedia explanation of Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada

To make people produce ID, they need a state law that says they have to and that law is constitutional if it refers to people the police reasonably suspect of being involved in a crime. Otherwise, you can't arrest somebody for refusing to produce ID.

[Jud325]

Pa. law


CHAPTER 15
LICENSING OF DRIVERS


§ 1501. Drivers required to be licensed.
(a) General rule.--No person, except those expressly exempted, shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway or public property in this Commonwealth unless the person has a driver's license valid under the provisions of this chapter. As used in this subsection, the term "public property" includes, but is not limited to, driveways and parking lots owned or leased by the Commonwealth, a political subdivision or an agency or instrumentality of either.




(d) Penalty.--Any person violating subsection (a) is guilty of a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of $200, except that, if the person charged furnishes satisfactory proof of having held a driver's license valid on the last day of the preceding driver's license period and no more than one year has elapsed from the last date for renewal, the fine shall be $25. No person charged with violating subsection (a) or (b) shall be convicted if the person produces at the office of the issuing authority within 15 days of the violation:
(1) a driver's license valid in this Commonwealth at the time of the violation; or
(2) if the driver's license is lost, stolen, destroyed or illegible, evidence that the driver was licensed at the time of the violation.
75c1501v
(July 1, 1981, P.L.202, No.63, eff. imd.; May 30, 1990, P.L.173, No.42; Dec. 18, 1992, P.L.1411, No.174, eff. 60 days; Dec. 21, 1998, P.L.1126, No.151, eff. 60 days)

[Bren]

Pa. law


CHAPTER 15
LICENSING OF DRIVERS


§ 1501. Drivers required to be licensed.
[B](a) General rule.--No person, except those expressly exempted, shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway or public property in this Commonwealth ....


The question was about passengers being required to produce ID. Drivers have to, pretty much everywhere.

[Jud325]

The question was about passengers being required to produce ID. Drivers have to, pretty much everywhere.

Read down a little further. In Pa., even the driver has 15 days to produce a DL. current at the time of the stop. You can give me the ride ,but I will beat the ticket. :wavey:

[samurairabbi]

Not exactly.

Here's a link to a wikipedia explanation of Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004).


Thank you for the clarifying link. It is always beneficial for me to get my act together BEFORE blowing my presentation before paying students.

Another 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision; the principal motif of modern American life!

[LC Deputy]

In Illinois that is no, but I can ask for it.

[Sam Spade]

Not exactly.

Here's a link to a wikipedia explanation of Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada

To make people produce ID, they need a state law that says they have to and that law is constitutional if it refers to people the police reasonably suspect of being involved in a crime. Otherwise, you can't arrest somebody for refusing to produce ID.

Beg pardon, but Hiibel absolutely does NOT authorize a state to require someone who's not engaged in any licensed activity to "produce ID". It authorizes laws where the person must identify himself. The law under consideration said, "Any person so detained shall identify himself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer.” In the NV case, simply providing his name would presumably have sufficed, and the laws that I'm aware of mimic that pattern.

Again I ask: How can the state require you to produce something that it can't require you to possess?

[DaBigBR]

Read down a little further. In Pa., even the driver has 15 days to produce a DL. current at the time of the stop. You can give me the ride ,but I will beat the ticket. :wavey:

That's not "beating" anything. That's an explicit provision of the law. We have the same thing in my state, and the driver ends up eating the $60 in court costs after they "beat" the ticket. Some victory it is. :upeyes:

[NEOH212]

I really don't see the big deal about showing ID to a policeman. It's really not that hard for me to hand him/her my ID so they can do their job.

On the other hand, since all cops are evil and want to take over the world along with the Government that's trying to infiltrate our race with hybrid alien babies, maybe it's not a good idea after all. You don't want them to find out where you live. They might take your tin foil hat! :rofl:

Seriously people. Just show your darn ID to the cop so they can do their job and you can be on your way. :wavey:

[Just_plinking]

I really don't see the big deal about showing ID to a policeman. It's really not that hard for me to hand him/her my ID so they can do their job.

On the other hand, since all cops are evil and want to take over the world along with the Government that's trying to infiltrate our race with hybrid alien babies, maybe it's not a good idea after all. You don't want them to find out where you live. They might take your tin foil hat! :rofl:

Seriously people. Just show your darn ID to the cop so they can do their job and you can be on your way. :wavey:

Nope. Evil transcends every demographic. If I feel you're A good honest person, i'll go out of my way to help you. If I don't, you can go pound sand, and I don't care what your job is. You talk rude to my woman and :steamed:

[NEOH212]

Nope. Evil transcends every demographic. If I feel you're A good honest person, i'll go out of my way to help you. If I don't, you can go pound sand, and I don't care what your job is. You talk rude to my woman and :steamed:

Did you ever stop and think that maybe the reason that some cops come across as rude is because they had to deal with A-hole people that wouldn't cooperate and show their ID? :whistling:

[NEOH212]

A officer should give what he gets. If he stops me and I'm courteous and cooperative, he should return in kind.

If I'm disrespectful and uncooperative, then whatever happens is my fault at that point.



Just remember, never talk to the police. :upeyes::upeyes::upeyes:

[Con43]

Seriously people. Just show your darn ID to the cop so they can do their job and you can be on your way.




And what job would that be ?. Asking to just be asking fulifills what part of the job............Fishing :whistling: :whistling:

[Just_plinking]

Did you ever stop and think that maybe the reason that some cops come across as rude is because they had to deal with A-hole people that wouldn't cooperate and show their ID? :whistling:

I don't have any personal experience with being rude to officers, so idk. Like I said anyone in any walk of life is susceptible to indiscretions and bad judgement. This has nothing to do with "us" vs. "them". People who think along such lines have little common ground with me.

Edit: And choosing to reserve any right granted by law has no bearing on whether a person is being rude or not.

[greenman19]

Here in N C there is no law stating that anyone, except for when operating a motor vehicle, has to I D themselves. Even if they are being charged with a crime. Of course we can try, convict and incarcerate someone as john doe.

There are a lot of cops around here that don't realize that though. (back in the day I didn't realize that untill I was writing up for it)

[Bren]

Beg pardon, but Hiibel absolutely does NOT authorize a state to require someone who's not engaged in any licensed activity to "produce ID". It authorizes laws where the person must identify himself. The law under consideration said, "Any person so detained shall identify himself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer.” In the NV case, simply providing his name would presumably have sufficed, and the laws that I'm aware of mimic that pattern.

Again I ask: How can the state require you to produce something that it can't require you to possess?

You are right - they are required to identify themselves, not "produce an ID."

[w01]

Does your CCW badge count if it has your name engraved on it?