School Me on ID

[Mstrty]

Whats the deal with LEO's asking for ID for non drivers in a vehicle. Hasnt happened to me. I might just watching too much TV? What are the requirements for providing ID in California. I realize sometimes it might just be fishing expeditions at times.

I know providing ID would make your stop go smoothly, where does the law stand?

[safewaysecurity]

You do not need to provide ID in California but upon probable cause... even then you are not required to carry ID on you. Reasonable suspicion in California is NOT enough to demand ID from you. So unless they have you arrested or have charges against you no need to show them anything but upon probable cause.

[MaHoTex]

If you are not driving, you are not required to carry your papers. If you are not carrying papers, you have no ID.

So, what happens if you are NOT driving and an LEO asks for ID? Say "No thanks I do not need any", and move on with your life?

[masameet]

Whats the deal with LEO's asking for ID for non drivers in a vehicle. Hasnt happened to me. I might just watching too much TV? What are the requirements for providing ID in California. I realize sometimes it might just be fishing expeditions at times.

I know providing ID would make your stop go smoothly, where does the law stand?

Two California cases on point:

1) In Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007), the SCOTUS held that "[w]hen police make a traffic stop, a passenger in the car, like the driver, is seized for Fourth Amendment purposes." Because of the seizure, the passenger may challenge the stop’s constitutionality.

In short, supposedly passengers are free to leave the stopped vehicle once the driver pulls over. But once the passenger begins to obey a cop's directives, he has given consent to seizure and must comply, including providing identification. Nevertheless the passenger has not extinguished his right to contest legally the seizure.

2) In Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983), the SCOTUS held California Penal Code Section 647(e) to be unconstitutional. The code required people who were stopped for loitering or wandering on the streets to identify themselves. This case involved Eddie Lawson, a black man who wore dreadlocks and liked to walk around San Diego County. He was often stopped for being in so-called "nice" (white) neighborhoods. According to Wikipedia

[Mstrty]

Thank you for the above post^^^. This is the information I was looking for. Not trying to be any test case just want to ensure I know the law as best I can.

[Samuelx]

If you are a passenger in a car that was pulled over by an LEO, you ARE being detained. The officer/deputy can order you stay in the car OR exit the car.

[tyrist]

If you violate any law you are expected to have identification. If you don't have it you can be held in custody.

[oldsmoboat]

If you are a passenger in a car that was pulled over by an LEO, you ARE being detained. The officer/deputy can order you stay in the car OR exit the car.

Which is it?

[Samuelx]

I guess it will depend on if you get pulled over by him or me... Not to be cavalier, but my interpretations of Brendlin vs California, Maryland vs Wilson, People vs Castellon, etal, are different than masameet's...

Btw, if you are being cited or arrested (and you don't have ID), you may be At Least detained and brought to the station to be identified by fingerprints/booked.

[biochembruin]

Passengers in a traffic stop ARE detained. If you disobey an order to remain in or get out of a vehicle, you can be arrested for 148 PC. And reasonable force can be used to effect an arrest.

[SoCalDep]

The way it was explained to me, though I'm not sure I agree, and it will probably be tested in the courts at some point, is that passengers in a vehicle are detained during a traffic stop (Brendlin) and are therefore not free to leave. They are not, however, detained due to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, but for officer safety purposes during the stop. Therefore you cannot compel a passenger (though you may ask) to provide identification without independent reasonable suspicion of criminal activity by the passenger.

[GrizzlyGuy]

Your county or city may have a code that requires you to provide ID, even though Kolender v. Lawson knocked out the state's stop-and-ID law. For example, this one is from Nevada county:

Sec. G-VII 1.25 Establishing Identification Requirements During Criminal Investigation

A. Any person lawfully detained by a peace officer for investigatory questioning shall, upon request of a peace officer, produce identification sufficient to indicate his name and date of birth or place of residence. A verbal or written statement of name and birthdate or residence address shall constitute sufficient identification.

[biochembruin]

The way it was explained to me, though I'm not sure I agree, and it will probably be tested in the courts at some point, is that passengers in a vehicle are detained during a traffic stop (Brendlin) and are therefore not free to leave. They are not, however, detained due to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, but for officer safety purposes during the stop. Therefore you cannot compel a passenger (though you may ask) to provide identification without independent reasonable suspicion of criminal activity by the passenger.

This is correct. The ID request of a passenger detained merely as a consequence of the traffic stop does not constitute an additional detention, and the denial of the request does not constitute probable cause to arrest for 148 PC. However, providing false ID, even under the circumstances of the passenger detention will provide said probable cause for arrest. Additionally, if the officer develops additional reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, they can demand ID (ie, not merely request ID). Courts have ruled that asking for identifying information from passengers at a traffic stop is a minimal intrusion which is reasonable due to the inherent risks associated with traffic stops.

[Sniper3142]

If you violate any law you are expected to have identification. If you don't have it you can be held in custody.

Yes but you are not required to have ID unless you are operating a motor vehicle.

PERIOD.

Committing a crime is a whole other can of worms. You'll need to have more than ID in that case (a lawyer might be a good idea).

[Samuelx]

You can also be cited while operating a bicycle or as a pedestrian or for committing a crime without driving or a vehicle being involved. In those cases where you are eligible to be cited out in the field, having your CA ID or DL with you can have you on your way after a brief interlude - as opposed to being brought to the station and possibly waiting for hours and hours and hours for your fingerprint return from Sacramento...