P
PrefersPrivacy
Guest
Hi, newuser here. I'm representing myself against the misdemeanor charge of "failure to identify to a police officer." My trial is soon, so this forum seemed like a fun thing to try.
Here's the story, as short as I can tell it.
I walk, often at night, around my neighborhood in any of several routes which I find pleasant. Nothing nefarious going on, I just like to walk in the silence of the night.
One morning/night I'm walking and a policeman drives up, gets out and approaches me. He demands my I.D., and I tell him that in the state of Texas, I'm under no obligation to identify myself to him. He tells me he understands that, but that I should understand that he's "... just doing [his] job, you know." He explains that somebody is breaking into cars around the neighborhood. Okay, fine, to get him to go away I showed him my DL, and that was that. He followed me out of the area but nothing came of it.
Well, a couple weeks later- same cop, same area, same request, same explanation of Texas law from me, Whoah! Different reaction from policeman. I got arrested for refusing to tell the cop my name.
(for those not familiar with http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/pc/3802.htm">Texas Penal Code section 38.02)
Good lord, you'd think that http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=443&invol=47">Brown v. Texas would have stopped this a long time ago- like 25 years ago! It's very clear from the way the Code is constructed that I was illegally arrested. I plead not guilty and as I say, my trial is soon.
My questions...
1. Should I bother testifying?
I don't believe that the prosecution can even establish reasonable suspicion supporting the stop and frisk that started this. i've seen the officer's report- there's <b>nothing there</b>. There's lots of talk about a "suspect" but the only justification of the officer's suspicion is that "criminal mischief" had occurred "in the area." Firstly, I don't think there had been any recent reports of mischief. Secondly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that being in a high-crime area does not in itself constitute reasonable suspicion. I believe I can show that my behavior was entirely consistent with that of an innocent person.
2. If I do not testify, how best to approach the issue of the prior encounter? Can I simply ask the officer about it during cross? It's my belief that the prior encounter demonstrates that the officer <i>already knew</i> my name and address, and that the arrest for failure to ID was incidental to the officer's investigation into crimes for which he had no probable cause to believe I was responsible.
Anyway- the prosecution has made the contention that refusing to give a name at all is the same thing as giving a false name. That is obviously not a legally sound position to take. Nevertheless, it was enough to send this case to trial. So to be certain I can defend myself, I must dispute the existence of reasonable suspicion. Any help, advice, tips or warnings are all greatly appreciated.
Here's the story, as short as I can tell it.
I walk, often at night, around my neighborhood in any of several routes which I find pleasant. Nothing nefarious going on, I just like to walk in the silence of the night.
One morning/night I'm walking and a policeman drives up, gets out and approaches me. He demands my I.D., and I tell him that in the state of Texas, I'm under no obligation to identify myself to him. He tells me he understands that, but that I should understand that he's "... just doing [his] job, you know." He explains that somebody is breaking into cars around the neighborhood. Okay, fine, to get him to go away I showed him my DL, and that was that. He followed me out of the area but nothing came of it.
Well, a couple weeks later- same cop, same area, same request, same explanation of Texas law from me, Whoah! Different reaction from policeman. I got arrested for refusing to tell the cop my name.
(for those not familiar with http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/pc/3802.htm">Texas Penal Code section 38.02)
Good lord, you'd think that http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=443&invol=47">Brown v. Texas would have stopped this a long time ago- like 25 years ago! It's very clear from the way the Code is constructed that I was illegally arrested. I plead not guilty and as I say, my trial is soon.
My questions...
1. Should I bother testifying?
I don't believe that the prosecution can even establish reasonable suspicion supporting the stop and frisk that started this. i've seen the officer's report- there's <b>nothing there</b>. There's lots of talk about a "suspect" but the only justification of the officer's suspicion is that "criminal mischief" had occurred "in the area." Firstly, I don't think there had been any recent reports of mischief. Secondly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that being in a high-crime area does not in itself constitute reasonable suspicion. I believe I can show that my behavior was entirely consistent with that of an innocent person.
2. If I do not testify, how best to approach the issue of the prior encounter? Can I simply ask the officer about it during cross? It's my belief that the prior encounter demonstrates that the officer <i>already knew</i> my name and address, and that the arrest for failure to ID was incidental to the officer's investigation into crimes for which he had no probable cause to believe I was responsible.
Anyway- the prosecution has made the contention that refusing to give a name at all is the same thing as giving a false name. That is obviously not a legally sound position to take. Nevertheless, it was enough to send this case to trial. So to be certain I can defend myself, I must dispute the existence of reasonable suspicion. Any help, advice, tips or warnings are all greatly appreciated.
Last edited: