in Need of Simple Clear Language

[GONZO!!!]

Can someone please confirm in simple clear language Indiana ' s law on having to produce a driver's license and identify one's self? Needing to be clear on whether I MUST identify and respond to questions without PC or RAS.

Please leave all the Internet machismo "pound sand" responses out. Looking for clear intelligent information

Thanks...

GONZO

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Can someone please confirm in simple clear language Indiana ' s law on having to produce a driver's license and identify one's self?

You want to see 9-24-1-1 and 34-28-5-3.5 then.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Needing to be clear on whether I MUST identify and respond to questions without PC or RAS.

What? Not tracking.

Can you give some context? Why do we want to talk to cops again?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

. Looking for clear intelligent information

So you came to INGO ?

Paging Harleyrider .....

 

[GONZO!!!]

I'm an old member here and I know we have LEO'S and Lawyers here and just wanted to wade through the legalize and get simple clear language

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Sure, Gonz, no problem. I gave the statutes in question. Do you have a question about the statutes?

 

[jsx1043]

IC 34-28-5-3.5 Refusal to identify self

Sec. 3.5. A person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either the person's: 1) name, address, and date of birth; or(2) driver's license, if in the person's possession;to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation commits a Class C misdemeanor.


It's not a question of whether YOU believe PC or RS exists... the burden of proof for traffic violations is the officer's good faith belief. Any questioning of said interaction is to take place in the court, not on the street.

 

[GONZO!!!]

So....walking down the street. ..or perhaps...come to a check point...if the officer asks, I DO have to provide I.D. and respond...?

 

[GONZO!!!]

I guess I forgot to add...

My friend sends me his video where he is stopped and asked for I.D. yadda yadda...he refuses and continually responds with the standard, "Am I being detained? Then I'm free to go" type of response....the officer cites changes in law and that he must comply. ..the officer sounded fairly convincing and at one point I actually started to believe that this officer actually knew what he was discussing. It seems he had done some homework and was happy to politely inform my friend of his error. My friend live near Evansville

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So....walking down the street.

Are you accused of committing an ordinance violation or infraction?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

My friend sends me his video where he is stopped and asked for I.D. yadda yadda...he refuses and continually responds with the standard, "Am I being detained? Then I'm free to go" type of response....the officer cites changes in law and that he must comply. ..the officer sounded fairly convincing and at one point I actually started to believe that this officer actually knew what he was discussing. It seems he had done some homework and was happy to politely inform my friend of his error. My friend live near Evansville

Was your friend driving a car?

 

[GONZO!!!]

Yes he was driving...thus was supposedly a DUI checkpoint.
He was eventually allowed to leave

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Yes he was driving...thus was supposedly a DUI checkpoint.

It is an interesting question as the Court of Appeals has not decided this.

So, if you are in a OWI roadblock and the cops want to see your driver's license, but you have not committed an IF or OV, need you produce your DL?

I could see both sides of that.

 

[mrjarrell]

So....walking down the street. ..or perhaps...come to a check point...if the officer asks, I DO have to provide I.D. and respond...?

Nope. You can answer them with the mantra..."Am I being detained"? and the ever popular..."Am I free to go"?. They can ask for, and you must produce, if you have been pulled over for an infraction or ordinance violation. If you're walking an you jay walk, they could also ask for ID. The rest of the time you don't need to engage them. Leave as soon as able.

Never have heard of a solid law saying you must, at a DUI checkpoint. Best not to engage them there. Just stick to the mantra until they're tired and send you on your way. Some cops will make up stuff to get you to talk. Don't fall for it.

 

[Vigilant]

Next twist, what about being a passenger in a vehicle that HAS been stopped for an infraction?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Next twist, what about being a passenger in a vehicle that HAS been stopped for an infraction?

Fact dependent, but generally not. If you aren't wearing your seat belt, for example, the answer could change. I am unaware of anything in IC code that compels you to identify if you are simply a passenger and no independent reason exists.

 

[Fargo]

Next twist, what about being a passenger in a vehicle that HAS been stopped for an infraction?

There are cases out there on that. Unless the passenger is suspected of committing an ifraction or OV, he does not need to identify.

http://weblive.ibj.com/lawyer/PDFs/06221001lmb.pdf

 

[Mr. Habib]

Next twist, what about being a passenger in a vehicle that HAS been stopped for an infraction?

Lookup Adam Starr v State of Indiana. It addresses this exact scenario.

 

[Fargo]

Lookup Adam Starr v State of Indiana. It addresses this exact scenario.

That is the case linked in the post above. Not ribbing you, just want to make it easy for folks to find.

 

[Six Forty-Two]

Here's a hypothetical situation, because what would INGO be without a twist in the thread like this, what if you are pulled over because your vehicle fits the description of a suspect's vehicle that was involved in a crime? You have done nothing wrong, just a coincidence that you are driving in the area in a similar car.