Don't need to show LTC to LEO when carrying.

[oohrah]

Had a weird collision with a runaway tire today that put me on the side of the road (long story, another time perhaps).

Local Temple PD LEO showed and wrote up the report. He asked for my DL and insurance. I was carrying (concealed), so I also showed him my LTC.

He said that was no longer necessary, since LTC went into effect. And that you only are required to show your LTC if they specifically ask for this.

Did I miss a law change?

[dlh]

Had a weird collision with a runaway tire today that put me on the side of the road (long story, another time perhaps).

Local Temple PD LEO showed and wrote up the report. He asked for my DL and insurance. I was carrying (concealed), so I also showed him my LTC.

He said that was no longer necessary, since LTC went into effect. And that you only are required to show your LTC if they specifically ask for this.

Did I miss a law change?

Don't know if this has been repealed or not. I always show law enforcement my handgun license if they ask "for identification."

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/government ... 1-205.html

[ELB]

I think it was two Legislatures ago, maybe three, that the Leg removed the penalty for failing to display a CHL when you are carrying and a Texas peace officer asks for identification. The requirement to display was left in the code, but the legal penalty for not doing so was removed in a special session.

I was not aware that anything since then has changed.

[ELB]

This is the statute as it is currently displayed by texas.gov site.

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.


Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.17(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.411.htm

[Soccerdad1995]

This is the statute as it is currently displayed by texas.gov site.

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.


Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.17(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.411.htm

As far as I know, there is no legal requirement to obtain either a DL or an "identification certificate" so it could be entirely impossible for one to comply with this law as written.

[The Annoyed Man]

This is the statute as it is currently displayed by texas.gov site.

Sec. 411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE. If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder's person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder's driver's license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder's handgun license.


Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 10.01(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 9.17(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 1146 (H.B. 2730), Sec. 12A.02, eff. September 1, 2009.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.411.htm

As far as I know, there is no legal requirement to obtain either a DL or an "identification certificate" so it could be entirely impossible for one to comply with this law as written.

Can you even get a LTC if you don’t have either a TDL or a state-issued ID card? I genuinely don’t know the answer to that, but if I had to guess, I’d guess that you could not get a LTC without having some other kind of state issued ID. That begs the question.... if you’re applying for a non-resident LTC, do you have to have photo ID issued by your state of residence?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[apostate]

DPS requires a copy of resident state DL or ID for nonresident applicants. I'm not sure what they would do if somebody sent a copy of their passport instead.

[Jusme]

There is probably a lot of misunderstanding, regarding, showing your LTC, while carrying, when interacting with LEO. My understanding, ( and Charles, please weigh in if I am mistaken) when you are stopped/ detained, for any violation, i.e., a traffic stop, you are required, to show your LTC, but, if it is a situation, described by the OP, it is not required, unless, asked for, by the LEO, in all of my traffic stops, since obtaining, my LTC, I have produced, it, along with my DL. In all cases, it was handed back, with not much more than a cusory, glance. I have absolutely no problem, showing any LEO, my LTC, and whether or not, it is required, is not an issue, for me.
All of my interactions, with LEO, have been positive, but, I have never been asked to produce my LTC, even when OC, by any LEO. JMHO

[Grundy1133]

There is probably a lot of misunderstanding, regarding, showing your LTC, while carrying, when interacting with LEO. My understanding, ( and Charles, please weigh in if I am mistaken) when you are stopped/ detained, for any violation, i.e., a traffic stop, you are required, to show your LTC, but, if it is a situation, described by the OP, it is not required, unless, asked for, by the LEO, in all of my traffic stops, since obtaining, my LTC, I have produced, it, along with my DL. In all cases, it was handed back, with not much more than a cusory, glance. I have absolutely no problem, showing any LEO, my LTC, and whether or not, it is required, is not an issue, for me.
All of my interactions, with LEO, have been positive, but, I have never been asked to produce my LTC, even when OC, by any LEO. JMHO

this was always my understanding... if you're breaking the law and LEO asks for ID hand him your LTC as well as DL. if you were involved in an incident where you were breaking no laws, you're not obligated to show them your LTC when asked for ID.

[ScottDLS]

So here's how the law reads:

[GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE.
If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.

So the question I've heard raised is when may a LEO or Magistrate DEMAND (with the force of law) that a person display identification. If you're stopped while driving, the transportation code allows the LEO to demand a DL. Failure to produce such could result in being cited for driving without a license. However, theoretically, a traffic stop must be based on probable cause that a crime is taking place or is about to take place. Simply because driving without a license is a crime does not mean that every person driving can be stopped. There is Federal case law to back this up. Carrying a handgun without a license is (sometimes) a crime, but it's not clear whether it is sufficient probable cause to stop you, or even enough reasonable, articulable, suspicion, for a "Terry" stop and detain. Since there is no "stop and ID law" in Texas, it is not clear that a LEO or magistrate may lawfully detain you and legally DEMAND ID. Even if a LEO has probable cause to arrest you...you are only required to identify yourself by truthfully giving your name and date of birth. I guess the point is if you are carrying and not committing any crime, the police have no probable cause to arrest you, search you, and then find that you have a weapon. If they did find one, and you were not licensed as required, then theoretically the charge would be thrown out due to the search being unlawful... Now in reality, good luck with that.

[Papa_Tiger]

So here's how the law reads:

[GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE.
If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.

So the question I've heard raised is when may a LEO or Magistrate DEMAND (with the force of law) that a person display identification. If you're stopped while driving, the transportation code allows the LEO to demand a DL. Failure to produce such could result in being cited for driving without a license. However, theoretically, a traffic stop must be based on probable cause that a crime is taking place or is about to take place. Simply because driving without a license is a crime does not mean that every person driving can be stopped. There is Federal case law to back this up. Carrying a handgun without a license is (sometimes) a crime, but it's not clear whether it is sufficient probable cause to stop you, or even enough reasonable, articulable, suspicion, for a "Terry" stop and detain. Since there is no "stop and ID law" in Texas, it is not clear that a LEO or magistrate may lawfully detain you and legally DEMAND ID. Even if a LEO has probable cause to arrest you...you are only required to identify yourself by truthfully giving your name and date of birth. I guess the point is if you are carrying and not committing any crime, the police have no probable cause to arrest you, search you, and then find that you have a weapon. If they did find one, and you were not licensed as required, then theoretically the charge would be thrown out due to the search being unlawful... Now in reality, good luck with that.

Guess what they try to charge you with if you are not under arrest, but they want to get your ID?

Failure to ID. Many police officers are not familiar with the actual text of TPC 38.02 which reads:

(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 .

Nowhere in this statute are you compelled to give an ID if you are detained, but there are criminal penalties if you give false information while detained. It is an add-on charge if you are lawfully arrested. Good luck getting officers to understand the law if you refuse to ID only when you are lawfully detained (i.e. non-consentual or "Terry" stop with reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed).

[oohrah]

So here's how the law reads:

[GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE.
If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.

So the question I've heard raised is when may a LEO or Magistrate DEMAND (with the force of law) that a person display identification. If you're stopped while driving, the transportation code allows the LEO to demand a DL. Failure to produce such could result in being cited for driving without a license. However, theoretically, a traffic stop must be based on probable cause that a crime is taking place or is about to take place. Simply because driving without a license is a crime does not mean that every person driving can be stopped. There is Federal case law to back this up. Carrying a handgun without a license is (sometimes) a crime, but it's not clear whether it is sufficient probable cause to stop you, or even enough reasonable, articulable, suspicion, for a "Terry" stop and detain. Since there is no "stop and ID law" in Texas, it is not clear that a LEO or magistrate may lawfully detain you and legally DEMAND ID. Even if a LEO has probable cause to arrest you...you are only required to identify yourself by truthfully giving your name and date of birth. I guess the point is if you are carrying and not committing any crime, the police have no probable cause to arrest you, search you, and then find that you have a weapon. If they did find one, and you were not licensed as required, then theoretically the charge would be thrown out due to the search being unlawful... Now in reality, good luck with that.

According to the LEO I interacted with, this GC does no longer apply. I was not stopped, I had an accident and the LEO showed up after, and asked for ID to write up the accident report.

[Medley86]

So here's how the law reads:

[GC §411.205. REQUIREMENT TO DISPLAY LICENSE.
If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a magistrate or a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification certificate issued by the department and the license holder’s handgun license.

So the question I've heard raised is when may a LEO or Magistrate DEMAND (with the force of law) that a person display identification. If you're stopped while driving, the transportation code allows the LEO to demand a DL. Failure to produce such could result in being cited for driving without a license. However, theoretically, a traffic stop must be based on probable cause that a crime is taking place or is about to take place. Simply because driving without a license is a crime does not mean that every person driving can be stopped. There is Federal case law to back this up. Carrying a handgun without a license is (sometimes) a crime, but it's not clear whether it is sufficient probable cause to stop you, or even enough reasonable, articulable, suspicion, for a "Terry" stop and detain. Since there is no "stop and ID law" in Texas, it is not clear that a LEO or magistrate may lawfully detain you and legally DEMAND ID. Even if a LEO has probable cause to arrest you...you are only required to identify yourself by truthfully giving your name and date of birth. I guess the point is if you are carrying and not committing any crime, the police have no probable cause to arrest you, search you, and then find that you have a weapon. If they did find one, and you were not licensed as required, then theoretically the charge would be thrown out due to the search being unlawful... Now in reality, good luck with that.

The only time I have ever refused to produce a license was an incident where there was no probable cause. An out of town game warden was working the county near the beginning of deer season, I stopped at a convenience store after dark for a drink. The warden wanted my hunting license(I was wearing a camo long sleeve shirt but hadn't been hunting) I told him no and walked out, nothing else was said. As I have gotten older I'm surprised he didn't say anything but I guess he decided it wasn't worth it.

[ELB]

...According to the LEO I interacted with, this GC does no longer apply. ...

I don't believe he is correct, but it is a useless bit of code.

[Charles L. Cotton]

...According to the LEO I interacted with, this GC does no longer apply. ...

I don't believe he is correct, but it is a useless bit of code.

The duty to disclose your LTC still exists. The penalties were removed in 2009 and that may be what the LEO means. A duty without a remedy for noncompliance is effectively neutered.

Chas.