Definition of a Texas LEO's "lawful commands"?

[surprise_i'm_armed]

As a spinoff to the Keene, TX chestcam of the lady who didn't present DL/Insurance fast enough:

Somewhere along the line, I have heard lawmen use the term "lawful command".

Does Texas law define what lawful commands are?

IMHO, it would seem that asking for your DL/CHL/Insurance card would qualify, but what else can they
ask citizens to do?

If a LEO stops a pedestrian on the street, but the pedestrian walks away, this usually results in the LEO
chasing the person down. If the person has the Miranda right to remain silent, why don't they have the
right to keep walking?

Would it be a lawful command for a LEO to ask one of us to break concealment of our handguns?

TIA / SIA

[WildBill]

Good question. Apparently in Texas there is no such law. According to the link below, some cities have a local ordinance for this crime.

http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2 ... awful.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[A-R]

Not the whole answer, but a start based on Federal case law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_v._Mimms" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[A-R]

Next, look at police duties:

Code of Criminal Procedure 2.13. DUTIES AND POWERS. (a) It is the duty of every peace officer to preserve the peace within the officer's jurisdiction. To effect this purpose, the officer shall use all lawful means.
(b) The officer shall:
(1) in every case authorized by the provisions of this Code, interfere without warrant to prevent or suppress crime;
(2) execute all lawful process issued to the officer by any magistrate or court;
(3) give notice to some magistrate of all offenses committed within the officer's jurisdiction, where the officer has good reason to believe there has been a violation of the penal law; and
(4) arrest offenders without warrant in every case where the officer is authorized by law, in order that they may be taken before the proper magistrate or court and be tried.
(c) It is the duty of every officer to take possession of a child under Article 63.009(g).

The police "duty" - I assume - was a lawful traffic stop for violation of some provision of the traffic code.

And then refusing to comply with an officers lawful orders given to effect his lawful duties could be:

Penal Code 38.15.  INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC DUTIES. (a) A person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with:
(1)  a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law;
(b)  An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
(d)  It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the interruption, disruption, impediment, or interference alleged consisted of speech only.

(d) above could be an issue related to the "passive resistance" mentioned in WildBill's link above

[A-R]

All the above of course DOES NOT give the officer right to act like a jerk - he SHOULD still remain professional and courteous.

[tomtexan]

All the above of course DOES NOT give the officer right to act like a jerk - he SHOULD still remain professional and courteous.

Stern, but professional and courteous at the same time.

[lbuehler325]

Asking for ID/Drivers License is not necessarily a lawful order. According to our Bill of Rights' 4th Amendment, we have the right to be secure in our person. Unless there is reasonable (and articulated) suspicion, you do not have to give your identity to an officer (that would be an illegal search). Before giving your ID card, you can always ask why you are being detained, and if they say you aren't being detained, you can always ask if you are free to go then. My guess is this grandmother was being detained for some other said violation. That said, it was not necessary to drag the driver from the vehicle. That cop was simply a bully... a government thug with a badge, who mistakes his responsibility to protect and SERVE as license to bully anyone. I hope he feels like a tough guy, because most others do not think he's tough at all.

[recaffeination]

You can refuse to show ID if you're walking around but if you're driving a motor vehicle and refuse to show it, you can and should be charged with driving without a license. Since you have no license, it may be prudent for the cop to prevent you from continuing to drive illegally in his presence.

Similarly, if you're hunting and refuse to show your hunting license, you can and should be charged with hunting without a license, with some very narrow exceptions. And it may be prudent to not allow you to continue to possess whatever you bagged.

[lbuehler325]

You can refuse to show ID if you're walking around but if you're driving a motor vehicle and refuse to show it, you can and should be charged with driving without a license. Since you have no license, it may be prudent for the cop to prevent you from continuing to drive illegally in his presence.

Similarly, if you're hunting and refuse to show your hunting license, you can and should be charged with hunting without a license, with some very narrow exceptions. And it may be prudent to not allow you to continue to possess whatever you bagged.

I disagree. Random checkpoints involve police officers stopping cars, but there must be reasonable suspicion that the operator is operating a vehicle without a license to be forced to present such. Otherwise a violation must be found to trigger presentation of identification. Once you are stopped for a traffic violation, there is reasonable suspicion (i.e. you cannot signal a turn, so maybe you aren't legally qualified to drive). But a traffic check point is different. Without cause, you are not subject to any search or seizure. I, personally don't wish to be subject to warrentless or unfounded hassling by law enforcement. Granted, this is not the case for granny.

[anygunanywhere]

Texas LEO lawful command:

"Bring me two glazed and one cream filled!"

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Anygunanywhere

[Geaux Tigers]

Two donuts and a large coffee is an order not a command.

[talltex]

Two donuts and a large coffee is an order not a command.

depends on how you say it....(command voice)

[anygunanywhere]

Definition of order - Give an authoritative direction or instruction to do something.

Definition of command - an authoritative order.

Pretty much the same.

Anygunanywhere

[smoothoperator]

I usually place my order at restaurants. Maybe I should try a command next time.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

I usually place my order at restaurants. Maybe I should try a command next time.

Give me 2 donuts and a coffee!!

Let me see your napkins!!!

Do it now!!!

SIA