Questions About LEO's Asking For ID's When I'm Simply Passenger

[Abraham]

Or, an LEO knocks on my door and requests an I.D.

I have mixed opinions about this.

For example: An LEO knocks on my door, requests maybe even insists I show him my I.D. Let's assume I'm innocent of any type of wrong doing. My immediate thought is to tell him we're not in WW11 Nazi Germany and he can get stuffed with his question. I'm in my own home, performing nothing illegal, but he may come up with something like "I'm chasing a bad guy in your neighborhood, so crank out some I.D. sir, now.

Isn't this a 4th Amendment issue? L.E. doesn't get to insist I prove I live here. What the heck? Somewhere along the line, this is stepping over the boundary (seems to me) into police state tactics.

Or, I'm a passenger in a car where the driver is responsible for breaking a traffic law, but the L.E.O. wants my I.D. too when I haven't broken the law, I'm simply the passenger, so what gives? Some of the L.E.O. argue that without you providing an I.D. (as a home owner or vehicle passenger or simply walking down the street minding your own business) how can they tell if you don't have warrants out on you, which to me sounds like an insulting fishing expedition....

I've been watching many episodes of "Live PD" and that's where I see type thing done repeatedly. And, in one instance the L.E.O. told the car passenger (I think, could be wrong, but this happened in South Carolina) that their state law requires citizens are by law required to have I.D. on them at all times. Say what? Again, I'm flummoxed as I thought given we're U.S. citizens we don't have to have I.D. simply for existing...driving yes, carry a gun, yes, and yes you must have an I.D. to collect welfare too, but having I.D. just to have it...I don't think so. Or, are we heading to having to have state passports and border checks between states. Think I'm overstating it? I don't.

If this sounds like I'm cop bashing I'm not. I'm very pro Law Enforcement, but some of these situations would really tick me off if they happened to me and I have the resources to fight such (my opinion) foolishness.

Go ahead, knock on my home door and insist I I.D. myself. No, I'm not threatening violence. I'm getting a lawyer involved and we'll see I can be bullied or not when I've not committed any crime of any kind...

What say you about this sort of thing?

Now, get off my lawn, dagnabbitt!!

[rotor]

What bothers me more now, and I really hate to say it, but I worry more about being shot by that LEO when opening my door. Too many unarmed citizens being shot.

[LeonCarr]

Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 38.02. FAILURE TO IDENTIFY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.

(b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has:

(1) lawfully arrested the person;

(2) lawfully detained the person; or

(3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.

(c) Except as provided by Subsections (d) and (e), an offense under this section is:

(1) a Class C misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (a); or

(2) a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (b).

(d) If it is shown on the trial of an offense under this section that the defendant was a fugitive from justice at the time of the offense, the offense is:

(1) a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (a); or

(2) a Class A misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (b).

(e) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under Section 106.07, Alcoholic Beverage Code, the actor may be prosecuted only under Section 106.07.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

[cedarparkdad987]

Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 38.02. FAILURE TO IDENTIFY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.

(b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has:

(1) lawfully arrested the person;

(2) lawfully detained the person; or

(3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

I think we're talking about two separate issues. One is a car stop. one is a house situation (I think). IN the house situation, the owner is not obligated to answer the door without a warrant, much less provide information.

In the car situation, the person is not obligated to provide any information unless he has been arrested. If he does provide information it cannot be false. Pragmatically though, if they are asking for ID I would provide it as it does not negatively impact me and failure to do so will likely lead to an arrest for...something.

[LeonCarr]

So the only time you can have a witness to a criminal offense is on a traffic stop?

38.02(b)(3) does not differentiate between a traffic stop and a "house stop".

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

[Liberty]

At least here in Texas we are not required to show an ID._At least if not driving or or packing. That being said I would cooperate unless the officer was being obtuse, rude or otherwise fishing. That being said I believe that we are required to give the officer Identifying information if asked. Most times if one is being interviewed for calling in a complaint or as a witness the officer will ask for an ID. It is just easier for him to copy the information.

I had one cop once insisted that I tell him my social security number. I politely told him no, that I had the right to withhold that info. Eventually he gave up. I received no ticket

[Abraham]

"Pragmatically though, if they are asking for ID I would provide it as it does not negatively impact me and failure to do so will likely lead to an arrest for...something."

This is the kind of thing thing that bugs the heck out of me. I'm really loath anyone attempting to intimidate me, most especially if I've done nothing wrong.

Yes, no doubt, I agree, if I'm arrested, of course I have to provide truthful information. And will.

My point, and I think it gets murky for some is: There's a certain point L.E. may possibly step over the line and they depend on you being/feeling intimidated and complying with what may very well be something they're bluffing about, buy you feel like you must comply or else. My aching patootey.

If, I'm stopped by L.E. driving/carrying or breaking the traffic law, they have every right to request/insist on I.D. and I will comply willingly.

And no, they've no right to my SS security number.

It's when they don't have the authority, but assume us common citizens must obey because they're always in the right, even when they're not that I get feisty and will get lawyers involved. If the L.E.O. has stepped over their bounds, they will be in a heap o'trouble and their prosecution willl be forthcoming....

[Teamless]

otherwise fishing.

Most times they are "fishing" for something that they can hook you up on.

I will always be respectful to an officer who is doing his duty (even if I don't agree with his methods).
If asked for ID, I would give it, as I am always carrying and the law states (even without a penalty for not doing so) I must do this.

However, they want to "search my car" "search my person" or "search my house" - my answer is NO.
If they say "what do you have to hide? My answer is still "NO"
"where are you coming from" "where are you going" - again, these are all used for 'fishing' - to find out info to hang you up on.

[Abraham]

Teamless,

One of the other annoyances is being questioned about where I'm going or have come from?

Unless, I'm under arrest and being investigated, that's my business and I don't owe you L.E.O. an explanation of my coming and going or do you think I do? Pssssst, here's a hint: I don't.

Darn it, we're not living in WW11 Nazi Germany.

Where am I going with this and why? Stop L.E.O., we're not all poor and easily intimidated who must comply. Find out when 'you're being interrogated' by my lawyer as to your Gestapo tactics.

Let's see, am I an American? Yes. Am I subject to interrogation unless I've broken some law? No.

Do I want to see criminals caught?

Absolutely.

But doing so doesn't provide a blanket legal interrogation authority of everyday citizens, because, hey you never know L.E.O. these people may be criminals...

Go ahead, try it.

I'm sure criminals are always threatening L.E. with dire consequences because they L.E. are actually doing their jobs and rightly so, but when they step over the line, there are people with enough resources to punt them into next week of either no jobs or traffic control where once they had status...

How do I know?

One was a cop beating a guy in handcuffs.

He's no longer in L.E.

There are other cases of L.E. stepping over the line.

I want L.E. to do their jobs, but not recklessly...

[Soccerdad1995]

otherwise fishing.

Most times they are "fishing" for something that they can hook you up on.

I will always be respectful to an officer who is doing his duty (even if I don't agree with his methods).
If asked for ID, I would give it, as I am always carrying and the law states (even without a penalty for not doing so) I must do this.

However, they want to "search my car" "search my person" or "search my house" - my answer is NO.
If they say "what do you have to hide? My answer is still "NO"
"where are you coming from" "where are you going" - again, these are all used for 'fishing' - to find out info to hang you up on.

My favorite answer to "where are you going" is "North" or South, West, East, as appropriate. If they want to ask a follow up question, I may well inquire whether I am free to go at that point since it appears that we have moved past their investigation of a possible crime (which was the reason for stopping me) and on to a friendly chat. Unfortunately, I am usually too darn busy for friendly chats.

To the OP - If you don't want to talk with an officer who approaches your door, simply ask him / her to leave in a polite manner. This can be done with the door closed, and probably should be if you have a gun in hand / on your hip. If they don't leave right away, maybe call 911 and report the trespassing violation. Hopefully the guy standing at your door will answer the call and arrest himself. Or you could put a small "circle / slash badge" sticker on your window and have the LEO arrested without even asking them to leave. At least that is our old AG's opinion if I recall correctly.

The exception would be a situation where your home alarm has sounded and the LEO is trying to figure out whether you are a burglar. Hopefully it will be painfully obvious when you are in that situation as opposed to a LEO who just wants to stop by and say hello.

[swilkes]

In a traffic stop I didn’t think you had to show I’d or answer any questions being a passenger? They didn’t pull over the passenger they pull over the driver.

[cedarparkdad987]

So the only time you can have a witness to a criminal offense is on a traffic stop?

38.02(b)(3) does not differentiate between a traffic stop and a "house stop".

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

If a police officer knocks on the door to a house I can reply with "Dave's not here man!"

[Soccerdad1995]

In a traffic stop I didn’t think you had to show I’d or answer any questions being a passenger? They didn’t pull over the passenger they pull over the driver.

I don't think you do have to answer any questions unless there is reasonable suspicion that you (the passenger) have committed some type of a crime.

But the OP is talking about things you see on shows like "Live PD" and "Cops" where LEO's lie to folks and otherwise try to intimidate them into voluntarily giving up their ID. They do the same thing to try and get folks to consent to a search. I stopped watching Cops for this reason. I got tired of yelling at the TV. I get enough of that when I watch sports.

Personally, I think the fact that something illegal was found should be a near absolute defense to a "consensual" search later on in court. No rational person who fully understood their rights would ever consent to a search when they have something illegal in their vehicle. So obviously there was some type of misleading / deceit going on to get the "consent". This might be one reason why I have never been picked to serve on a criminal jury.

[Abraham]

All kidding aside, I'm a pro-Law Enforcement guy, but mess with me as an innocent citizen and the kind of stuff I sometimes witness, means you're law enforcement attorney better be good, cuz I'm coming after you if you've stepped over the line.

I'm not some intimidated white trash you can get away with mistreating this or that way. You Mr. L.E.O. must work within the law, if not, you're breaking it and will answer for it.

P.S. I come from a perspective of a guy who abides by the law, not some criminal hoping to get away with something...