Resisting arrest

[Orleander]

I swear I heard this on TV.
Someone was charged with non-violent resisting arrest. Basically he refused to give any info about himself.
Is there such a thing or am I swiftly sliding into dementia? Oh wait, that's kinda like tx's retarded question isn't it Anyways, did I hear it right?

[darrell]

New law says he must disclose who he is upon request of a police officer. It's not resisting its more like interferance or obstruction.

[scott715us]

I swear I heard this on TV.
Someone was charged with non-violent resisting arrest. Basically he refused to give any info about himself.
Is there such a thing or am I swiftly sliding into dementia? Oh wait, that's kinda like tx's retarded question isn't it Anyways, did I hear it right?

We have a law in TN that is close to that. As far as refusal to provide information, if they are not under suspicion of committing a crime, there is not much one can do. "Resisting stop, frisk, halt, arrest, or search - obstruction of service of legal writ or process."

a) It is an offense for a person to intentionally prevent or obstruct anyone known to the person to be a LE officer, or anyone acting in a LE officer's presence and at such officer's discretion, from effecting a stop, frisk, halt, arrest, or search of any person, including the defendant, by using force against the law enforcement officer or another.

If I am conducting a stop, and the person uses force, OR RUNS, I will be able to charge them with this offense. I believe we have a separate one for those already told they are under arrest and physically resists restraints, but I'll look into it. ;)

[acreature]

NC : Resist, Delay or Obstruct

Covers fleeing, fighting and refusing info.

[121Traffic]

Colorado's Statute pertaining to reasonable suspicion, terry stops/terry pat-downs, an request of verbal ID.

16-3-103. Stopping of suspect.
Statute text
(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.

(2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons.

[JD45]

From CA:

148. (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or
obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical
technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797)
of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to
discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other
punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding
one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail
not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

[skiingman]

All of the laws cited require "reasonable suspicion" on the LEO's part. Of course, "reasonable suspicion" is pretty broad.

If I'm walking down the street and some cop asks for my ID, I'm going to ask him why...then probably give it to him unless hes being an ***. Why would any innocent person not identify themself, given some reasonable reason to do so...like a cop asking.

Darrell, can you show us this new law?
-Garrett

[121Traffic]

All of the laws cited require "reasonable suspicion" on the LEO's part. Of course, "reasonable suspicion" is pretty broad.

If I'm walking down the street and some cop asks for my ID, I'm going to ask him why...then probably give it to him unless hes being an ***. Why would any innocent person not identify themself, given some reasonable reason to do so...like a cop asking.

Darrell, can you show us this new law?
-Garrett

HAHAHAHAHA. Reasonable suspicion is FAR from broad. Found this out first hand. You might be sure in your mind, but you had BETTER be able to articulate it to a jury. Dod you have a lawful reason to contact? It's not as black and white as you think, or as I thought.

[SockPuppet]

supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZS.html

Petitioner Hiibel was arrested and convicted in a Nevada court for refusing to identify himself to a police officer during an investigative stop involving a reported assault. Nevada’s “stop and identify” statute requires a person detained by an officer under suspicious circumstances to identify himself. The state intermediate appellate court affirmed, rejecting Hiibel’s argument that the state law’s application to his case violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed.

Held: Petitioner’s conviction does not violate his Fourth Amendment rights or the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on self-incrimination. Pp. 3—13.

[corporal716]

NC : Resist, Delay or Obstruct

Covers fleeing, fighting and refusing info.

Same in California

JD45 Beat me to it.

[skiingman]

HAHAHAHAHA. Reasonable suspicion is FAR from broad. Found this out first hand. You might be sure in your mind, but you had BETTER be able to articulate it to a jury. Dod you have a lawful reason to contact? It's not as black and white as you think, or as I thought.

Probably depends a whole heck of a lot on the state/judge. The deal with vehicle searches, for instance, is quite different from place to place.

"Reasonable suspicion" is more broad than say, "Probable cause".

Here in NY, being under 21...a cop can ask me to take a breathalyzer with "reasonable suspicion" instead of "probable cause" IIRC. Fine by me. I still don't get why any innocent person would refuse to identify themself, unless the cop was being an ******* or obviously "fishing".
-Garrett

[Orleander]

Thanks all!

[LidaRose]

What about prostitutes who often give false names? If they're found out, are they charged w/ obstruction?

LR

[mcsap]

If we arrest a person and they refuse to give their ID. We book them as John or Jane Doe ( Literally !) and the judge will make a bail condition that they do not get released until they DO ID themselves ( and it cn be verified).

A person who gives a fake name will be charged with False ID to Law Enforcement. A Misd 3rd.

[skiingman]

The ACLU pocket guide points out that while identifying oneself to police in a random situation isn't necessary, misidentifying oneself is certainly illegal.

It also points out that generally cooperation is key. Duh.
-Garrett