Traffic Stop

[rgs87]

TEXAS: i had a warrant for a traffic ticket that i feel behind on paying. i had called and got information on the amounts owed and was trying to come up with the funds. so yes i know i had a warrant. but my question is in regards to a traffic stop. my girlfriend was driving with me as a passenger on our way home from getting dinner. a police officer pulls us over comes to driver window and goes through the normal routine. license registration insurance and such. the stop was due to a tail light being out. then another officer comes to the passenger window, where i am sitting. and asks for my ID. i tell him i dont need to ID myself since this stop was not for me and i am just a passenger. he then continues to ask for my ID and threatens to arrest me and that i could be charge for not IDing myself. i tell him that isnt right, i have done nothing wrong and i am just a passneger and commited no crime. i ask if i am being detained and he tells me yes that the whole vehicle is detained. i again tell him that isnt right and that i did nothing wrong. again same threats are said. with the pressure of being threatened with charges i gave him my ID and they pull up the warrant and arrest me. i know i had this warrant and i was in the process of getting money together to take care of it as i was unemployed and just started a new job. but i feel that my civil rights were violated, warrant or not, i did nothing wrong and i was just a passenger and was forced into IDing myself. am i right to believe my rights were violated and

 

[FlyingRon]

He's free to ask all he wants. He's free to detain you as long as he has an articulable, reasonable suspicion that a crime had been convicted.

 

[rgs87]

im just a passenger in a traffic stop for a tail light. that is between the driver and the officer. the driver is exercising the privilege to drive, so she could be asked. im a passenger. the traffic stop has nothing to do with me as i am not exercising any privilege. therefore he can not ID me because i have commited no crime. and yes he is free to ask but that is all. i do not need to ID myself.

 

[FlyingRon]

So, cops are allowed to lie, as well. So what are you after? The warrant preexisted the stop. You don't have a right to be a fugitive. You can complain to the police department about the misbehavior of the officer, but it's not going to affect your other legal problems.

 

[Just Blue]

im just a passenger in a traffic stop for a tail light. that is between the driver and the officer. the driver is exercising the privilege to drive, so she could be asked. im a passenger. the traffic stop has nothing to do with me as i am not exercising any privilege. therefore he can not ID me because i have commited no crime. and yes he is free to ask but that is all. i do not need to ID myself.

Actually you did commit a crime ...hence the warrant.

 

[justalayman]

Actually you did commit a crime ...hence the warrant.

But at the time is what is important. The cop can only require a person id themselves after they have been arrested (not detained but actually arrested). Op had no legal obligation to identify himself but as often is the case it’s a matter of who blinks first.

In some situations the cop unlawfully threatening to arrest the person could result in a suppression of evidence but in this case it doesn’t matter since there is no evidence to consider.

 

[justalayman]

im just a passenger in a traffic stop for a tail light. that is between the driver and the officer. the driver is exercising the privilege to drive, so she could be asked. im a passenger. the traffic stop has nothing to do with me as i am not exercising any privilege. therefore he can not ID me because i have commited no crime. and yes he is free to ask but that is all. i do not need to ID myself.

So why did you identify yourself? You were on solid footing in refusing to identify yourself as Texas law mandates it only after you are actually arrested.

You blinked first. Cop won.

 

[quincy]

The ACLU offers for free a wallet-size card to carry with you, listing your rights when encountering police. It is helpful to have one available so that, when asked for ID and you know you do not have to turn it over to an officer, you can hand the officer the ACLU card instead.

That said, if you have nothing to hide, identifying yourself to a police officer is a pretty easy thing to do.

 

[TheGeekess]

my girlfriend was driving with me as a passenger on our way home from getting dinner. a police officer pulls us over

Whose car were you in?

 

[justalayman]

Whose car were you in?

Why do you believe that makes a difference?

Op was under no obligation to identify himself unless actually placed under arrest. The cop could have done many things to attempt to extend the detention or actually request a copy of the driver’s license (from state records) of the owner of the car and use that to identify the op (presuming it is his car) but nothing short of actually arresting the kid invoked the law requiring op to identify himself.

 

[quincy]

If the car was not registered and insured to rgs87's friend the driver, the police might have had good reason to check the ID of rgs87, to see if the car belonged to the passenger/occupant.

 

[justalayman]

If the car was not registered and insured to rgs87's friend the driver, the police might have had good reason to check the ID of rgs87, to see if the car belonged to the passenger/occupant.

That does not allow the police to demand identification. There is only one thing that allows them to legally require a person to identify themselves and that is they have placed them under arrest.

Then, unless they have reason (reasonable suspicion) to believe the car is stolen, they don’t have any right to continue the detention based on that reasoning. A person driving a car not owned by themselves is not in itself a basis for reasonable suspicion it is stolen.


Now if the car was owned by op which can provide for a reasonable suspicion the passenger may be the owner (and of course they can simply ask and it would be a very bad idea for the op to lie when answering), it could allow the police to detain the op (but still have no right to require he identify himself) while the police attempt to determine if op is in fact the owner of the car who happens to have a warrant out for his arrest. As I said before the police can obtain actual images of driver’s licenses in some states but surely can obtain a physical identification of the names party which can then, if it matches the passenger, allow for an arrest as the totality of he circumstances would allow for the police to make that leap.

In the end the op quite probably would have been identified anyway but since he blinked first, we’ll never know for sure.

 

[quincy]

I agree. I meant only that there can be good reason for the police to ask for the identities of passengers - and a mismatch between driver's license information and insurance/registration information can be a good reason.

 

[rgs87]

Whose car were you in?

it was her car

 

[rgs87]

If the car was not registered and insured to rgs87's friend the driver, the police might have had good reason to check the ID of rgs87, to see if the car belonged to the passenger/occupant.

the car belonged to the driver i was just the passenger. they pulled her over for the tail light. then thats when a cop came to my window asking for ID. i told him i didnt have to ID myself and thats when he got upset and started sayng that i would be arrested and charge if i didnt ID myself.