No I.D.

[seconds]

Just the CHL. But most will carry both if carrying one.

seconds

[hpcatx]

Just the CHL is INCORRECT.

First, if you are carrying under the authority of a CHL, it is my understanding that you will need to provide BOTH a driver's license (or state issued identification card) and the CHL. See Texas Government Code §411.205.

DISPLAYING LICENSE; PENALTY. (a) 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.

Second, regarding the requirements that one must have an ID at all times, Texas does not have an official "Stop and Identify" law on the books.

Texas does not require a detainee to identify himself, but does make it a crime to provide a false name. Texas Penal Code § 38.02 reads, in relevant part,
(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.
See Stop and Identify Statues footnotes.

You can walk down the street (without carrying, or without carrying under authority of a CHL) without an ID.*

The usual IANAL, etc...

*Edited to make clear.

[seconds]

I stand corrected! </grovel>

[hpcatx]

I stand corrected! </grovel>

Didn't mean to come off over the top... just wanted to make sure our fellow forum member didn't find himself/herself in any legal entanglements. Please, no groveling.

[C-dub]

I stand corrected! </grovel>

Didn't mean to come off over the top... just wanted to make sure our fellow forum member didn't find himself/herself in any legal entanglements. Please, no groveling.

I didn't think you did. It was a good answer and followed up with a cite.

[seconds]

All good.

[gigag04]

If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

[Dave2]

I think he's talking about not having his ID on him, not refusing to tell the cops who he his.

[E.Marquez]

If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

gigag04, can you provide a cite that requires us to ID ourselfs

Or under what code, law, would you cite someone for falling to comply with when you charge them with failure to ID.

Thanks

[RoyGBiv]

If you're walking down the street (when there is a sidewalk or with traffic), and refuse to ID, I would take you to jail for it. If you still refuse, I'd add fail to ID, and do a two finger lookup.

gigag04, can you provide a cite that requires us to ID ourselfs

Or under what code, law, would you cite someone for falling to comply with when you charge them with failure to ID.

Thanks

Another curious mind here too...
If I'm not doing anything other than walking down the street and someone (LEO or otherwise) asks me who I am and to show ID, with no cause....
Under what law would you have cause for arrest if I refused to ID myself?

[hpcatx]

I think he's talking about not having his ID on him, not refusing to tell the cops who he his.

This. I think you still must tell the LEO your name, address, etc.

I would also like to know the code that requires state identification to be with you at all times, if I am mistaken.

[gigag04]

One of the above posts describes a scenario of walking down the street. I can think of at least a two part traffic infractions a person could be committing while walking down the street:

Sec. 552.006.  USE OF SIDEWALK. (a) A pedestrian may not walk along and on a roadway if an adjacent sidewalk is provided and is accessible to the pedestrian.
(b)  If a sidewalk is not provided, a pedestrian walking along and on a highway shall if possible walk on:
(1)  the left side of the roadway; or
(2)  the shoulder of the highway facing oncoming traffic.
(c)  The operator of a vehicle emerging from or entering an alley, building, or private road or driveway shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian approaching on a sidewalk extending across the alley, building entrance or exit, road, or driveway.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 497, Sec. 3, eff. June 11, 2001.

So, using the above statute, I can assume a valid detention. You are not required to ID if you are merely detained. If a person refuses to ID when I have them detained for the above infraction, I would merely arrest for the TC violation. This guarantees I figure out who they are, and keeps me constitutionally bound.

Keep in mind, this is not an everyday enforcement action, but just a tool in the bag to supress crime.

[Bulldog1911]

One of the above posts describes a scenario of walking down the street. I can think of at least a two part traffic infractions a person is committing while walking down the street:

Sec. 552.006.  USE OF SIDEWALK. (a) A pedestrian may not walk along and on a roadway if an adjacent sidewalk is provided and is accessible to the pedestrian.
(b)  If a sidewalk is not provided, a pedestrian walking along and on a highway shall if possible walk on:
(1)  the left side of the roadway; or
(2)  the shoulder of the highway facing oncoming traffic.
(c)  The operator of a vehicle emerging from or entering an alley, building, or private road or driveway shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian approaching on a sidewalk extending across the alley, building entrance or exit, road, or driveway.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 497, Sec. 3, eff. June 11, 2001.

So, using the above statute, I can assume a valid detention. You are not required to ID if you are merely detained. If a person refuses to ID when I have them detained for the above infraction, I would merely arrest for the TC violation. This guarantees I figure out who they are, and keeps me constitutionally bound.

Keep in mind, this is not an everyday enforcement action, but just a tool in the bag to supress crime.

Unless there are no sidewalks, and he's on the left side of the road. Right? There are no sidewalks in my neighborhood.

[gigag04]

I'm clear - edited my wording accordingly.