Off duty request for ID

[puma guy]

I worked off duty, plain clothes assignments, however very rarely. It was a two man gig patrolling some trash apartments that had lots of problems. We had to break up a good size scrap with only concealed pistols and a radio. After, that, I refused to take part as not being in full uniform when trying to full scale police-work makes things tricky.

If he had no badge whatsoever, I would understand some extra steps to ensure he/she is a real LEO. Many depts/units (ie K9) use sewn on badges, so look for those too, as they are quite different from the typical shiny badges most patrolmen wear.

Regarding the authority of the LEO, they have the full force of law as described in CCP. Just a heads if anyone was leaning towards treating them like a mall rent-a-cop.

I would never do that. In my limited encounters with LEO I have met some Barney Fifes. As a teenager my brother and I were leaving my Dad's business late at night after doing some work. PoPo pulled up behind us and got out w/ guns drawn yelling hands up. All turned out OK, but while we were ponying up our ID and explaining the situation the other officer was searching our car and found a spent .22 cartridge under a floor mat. He approached us with his flashlight aimed at the shell in his hand and then very dramatically sniffed it and said "That's been fired!". The other officer was him holding back a grin, but we never even twitched a lip. Turned out the non-Barney knew my dad and just admonished us for being there that late. We just agreed and chalked off his making that statement to justify their having pulled weapons.

[texanjoker]

texanjoker,

Thank you!

I'm sure with CHL badges selling like hotcakes to the "CHL goober" crowd, it'll happen...you'll get to have a big laugh and then take em for a ride.

One other comment is that a plain clothed leo will have a dept issued ID. When plain clothed i flash both to show the badge isnt stolen. Leos usually ask another for the ID when contacted as well. When i work plain clothed i wear both. I have never had somebody not think i was a leo. Plain clothed crime suppression was fun

As far as the last post about barney fifes (not yours), i could tell 1000s of stories of the dumb things ive seen the public do on a daily basis. Im sure the other leos could add to that as well

This old laso video will help

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Skaven]

Hey all thanks for the input. As I stated before, he was a really nice guy. I didn't have any doubt in my mind that he was police, which is why I complied. I guess its one of those things where I want to learn the intricacies of the law so that if I ever get in a situation where I am dealing with a situation in which the fact that the person is a LEO is in question, I know how to handle it to keep myself from getting my identity stolen and what not.

[cb1000rider]

I would not have identified myself in those circumstances. Of course, I'd never be in those circumstances because I am never unarmed in public so I must then comply with the CHL identification requirements.

Might ask one of our resident LEOs how that would work out in similar circumstances. The officer was investigating a "disturbance" and although you don't have to hand him a DL, you do have to identify yourself... It's pretty trivial to for the officer to come up with a circumstance that justifies compelling ID. The officer does not have to give you reasons or tell you why he's demanding ID, BTW.

It's reasonable to ask the guy for his credentials first, but to refuse to give your name under this circumstance, that's not going to work out so well.

[Jumping Frog]

I would not have identified myself in those circumstances. Of course, I'd never be in those circumstances because I am never unarmed in public so I must then comply with the CHL identification requirements.

Might ask one of our resident LEOs how that would work out in similar circumstances. The officer was investigating a "disturbance" and although you don't have to hand him a DL, you do have to identify yourself... It's pretty trivial to for the officer to come up with a circumstance that justifies compelling ID. The officer does not have to give you reasons or tell you why he's demanding ID, BTW.

It's reasonable to ask the guy for his credentials first, but to refuse to give your name under this circumstance, that's not going to work out so well.

That is not accurate. A person cannot be forced to ID himself unless he has been arrested.

An investigation CANNOT compel identification.

[Jaguar]

I would not have identified myself in those circumstances. Of course, I'd never be in those circumstances because I am never unarmed in public so I must then comply with the CHL identification requirements.

Might ask one of our resident LEOs how that would work out in similar circumstances. The officer was investigating a "disturbance" and although you don't have to hand him a DL, you do have to identify yourself... It's pretty trivial to for the officer to come up with a circumstance that justifies compelling ID. The officer does not have to give you reasons or tell you why he's demanding ID, BTW.

It's reasonable to ask the guy for his credentials first, but to refuse to give your name under this circumstance, that's not going to work out so well.

No, you don't have to ID yourself unless you are under arrest. You cannot give false information, but you can refuse to give information until you are arrested, then you have to identify yourself. It seems simple to me but it also seems the LEOs on this thread do not agree with it.

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.

[cb1000rider]

Actually, you're right. I found this pretty interesting. I thought that detention required disclosure of ID, but apparently not... So I learned something today.
Caselaw is: Dutton v. Hayes-Pupko
I stand corrected.
Apparently LEOs get this wrong too, so be careful if you want to stand your ground.

It's worth noting that this is particular to Texas - it is not the same in other states. It's also worth noting that the US Supreme Court has ruled (Hiibel v Nevada) that a state can prosecute someone who refused to ID while detailed... I guess it's just not on the books in Texas (yet).

I thought that one possible exclusion for this would be if you are a passenger in a car that is stopped for a valid violation, you'd be a witness to a crime and required to ID. And apparently TXDPS thinks this way too, as they've arrested passengers for failure to ID. However, there is an internal memo on that issue, indicating that they should not get upset by passengers who don't comply, unless they have "articulable" suspicion - which isn't supported by Texas state law: http://libertyfight.com/2013/tx_trooper ... to_id.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[gigag04]

I never commented on fail to id.

If the class C refusal, you have to be arrested. If the class B - false info, you have to be detained or arrested.

[texanjoker]

I never commented on fail to id.

If the class C, you have to be arrested. If the class B, you have to be detained or arrested.

But what if....

[puma guy]

As far as the last post about barney fifes (not yours), i could tell 1000s of stories of the dumb things ive seen the public do on a daily basis. Im sure the other leos could add to that as well

This old laso video will help

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To be clear I wasn't making any statement or generalization about LEO's - Barneys or otherwise. My anecdote was simply to exemplify the fact I would not disrespect any officer under any circumstances. I've known too many police officers to ever do such a thing; besides my Dad's father NYPD Detective rank.

[jmra]

As far as the last post about barney fifes (not yours), i could tell 1000s of stories of the dumb things ive seen the public do on a daily basis. Im sure the other leos could add to that as well

This old laso video will help

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To be clear I wasn't making any statement or generalization about LEO's - Barneys or otherwise. My anecdote was simply to exemplify the fact I would not disrespect any officer under any circumstances. I've known too many police officers to ever do such a thing; besides my Dad's father NYPD Detective rank.

[youtube][/youtube]
Fixed it.