Immigration Law

Remove all ads!

@Gaear
Read all of the link you provided. You are taking one part out of context. The whole post is very carefull in what it says. I did my best searching and was able to find out little more except..... everywhere I looked it was recommended that you do just show ID unless a person was willing to end up in court.

@Chandos
You are right on Tx law, no sign of ID requirements just as I said above. However as in my pm I offer this opinion. This is not to refute (sp?) the correctness of your statement just offered as an opinion only. It happens to be the same as mine for the most part. It was an answer to a "must I show id" question.

--- It depends on the circumstances of your contact with the officer. The united states supreme court decision in terry vs ohio allows officers to stop and frisk anyone they have reasonable suspicion has committed or is about to commit a crime. This is known as the stop & frisk law.
--- Although Terry vs Ohio does not adress showing ID many think that identfying the person is part and parcel with stop & frisk. In the recent decision in the case of Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Nevada law that says just that. That you must identify yourself if stopped by an officer with resonable suspicion that a crime was committed. The supreme court has been standing behind officers with decisons that require people to ID themselves when legally stopped for suspicon of criminal activity. Also, most states have laws that state you may not hinder a police investigation and identifying one self has been considered part of any investigation, which is what Hiibel was basically about.
--- That was regading pre-arrest situations, now, if you are arrested its different, then you must ID yourself. The supreme court does require that you identify yourself if you have been arrested for any charge.
--- I could not find a state law in Texas that requires you to ID yourself just because an officer asks it, but if you are in a auto it is different, you are required to show your license when stopped in a car. Also, as I stated before, if an officer has arrested you you must identify yourself.
--- Should you refuse to identify yourself you may find yourself arrested for obstructing a peace officer and held until either you produce ID or until your fingerprints have been run through the FBI.
--- However, the above is when an officer has reasonable suspicion that you are up to no good. Police Officers do not have the authority to simply walk down the street and demand ID from random persons or from persons who have done nothing. They also can't stop you and demand ID simply because they feel you look like a bad guy. The officer must have some reason he can articulate to a judge that made him reasonably suspicious that you were committing a crime, had just committed a crime or were about to commit a crime.
--- Now just because I have explained the law to you don't think to be a fool and quote law to a working street officer and refuse to ID yourself because YOU don't think he has a justifiable reason to ID you. That will only get you brusied and in jail and rightfully so. The street is NEVER the place to argue with a peace officer. If you think you are in the right then your place to fight is in court. There you have a level playing field and you can have an attorney who can argue law for you.
--- If you are asked for ID just show it and then if you think the officer was exceeding his authority you can contact an attorney if you can afford one and if not contact the public defenders office, but first try to handle it by filing a complaint with the agency the officer works for.
--- If he was out of line they will discipline him and if not then see a public defender.
--- Also, by ID I mean telling the officer your name, DOB and address. It does not mean you have to have some formal type of ID.

Retired Deputy Sheriff with 21 years of service

This confirms what Chandos has stated also it repetes the warnings I have found elsewhere.

Something else I want to repete, the subject was immigratiom law. A lot of us have gone far astray in our postings. Has anyone besides NOG any idea of a way to improve the immigration problem? We do need what hard working good people bring with them to the US. This is what is important.

 

The confusion is, I think, that 1960 was 50 years ago. That would have to be closer to 1970, (40 years ago), which was pretty close to the year he became a cop. He is retired now and has been for several years.

 

Oh, xenophobes. Never change.