Identification required

[rpearce84]

Am I required by any law to show a peace officer any form of ID ( aside from a DL if I were to get pulled over for a traffic violation)?

[SVT-40]

Vehicle registration and proof of insurance.

[jdubs71]

By law you have to carry your ID in your possession when driving. If you don't provide it or your reg when asked for it, the officer can actually search your vehicle in places where people would likely keep that information i.e. the glove box, center console, visor etc. Not sure if i read that correctly or not, but you do not have to show any other form of ID other than your DL if thats what your asking.

12951. (a) The licensee shall have the valid driver's license
issued to him or her in his or her immediate possession at all times
when driving a motor vehicle upon a highway.
Any charge under this subdivision shall be dismissed when the
person charged produces in court a driver's license duly issued to
that person and valid at the time of his or her arrest, except that
upon a third or subsequent charge the court in its discretion may
dismiss the charge. When a temporary, interim, or duplicate driver's
license is produced in court, the charge shall not be dismissed
unless the court has been furnished proof by the Department of Motor
Vehicles that the temporary, interim, or duplicate license was issued
prior to the arrest, that the driving privilege and license had not
been suspended or revoked, and that the person was eligible for the
temporary, interim, or duplicate license.
(b) The driver of a motor vehicle shall present his or her license
for examination upon demand of a peace officer enforcing the
provisions of this code.

[CBR_rider]

I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking if you have to show ID at times OTHER than a traffic stop or other TYPES of ID during a traffic stop?

[rpearce84]

At other times. Obviously when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation I will show my DL. When an officer requests to see my ID for what I feel is no reason. Say sitting in my parked truck. Or walking down the street

[TRICKSTER]

At other times. Obviously when I'm pulled over for a traffic violation I will show my DL. When an officer requests to see my ID for what I feel is no reason. Say sitting in my parked truck. Or walking down the street

The problem with that attitude is that you better be 100% sure that there is no reason. I have seen many stubborn and misinformed people put themselves into a situation where their actions have turned a simple contact into an arrest.

[FresnoRob]

Some states require all adults to carry identification. I am not sure this is a law in California. Of course if you can't be correctly identified the Leo can always take you to jail until your identity can be verified.

[Tripper]

Identification required

Some states require all adults to carry identification. I am not sure this is a law in California. Of course if you can't be correctly identified the Leo can always take you to jail until your identity can be verified.

No, there is no ID required law in CA
If he is investigating, I need to not lie about my name, if I have no ID, and he takes me to jail to 'verify', there will be problems. If I lie and he is investigating, there will be problems
He for sure can't just take you to jail because you don't have ID

Sent from iPhone

[FresnoRob]

No, there is no ID required law in CA
If he is investigating, I need to not lie about my name, if I have no ID, and he takes me to jail to 'verify', there will be problems. If I lie and he is investigating, there will be problems
He for sure can't just take you to jail because you don't have ID

Sent from iPhone

He would need cause to detain you. If he has cause he can.
He would not be taking you to jail for not carrying an ID. It would be to run your finger prints to verify who you are.

[Tripper]

Identification required

He would need cause to detain you. If he has cause he can.

He would not be taking you to jail for not carrying an ID. It would be to run your finger prints to verify who you are.

Your statement kind of contradicts itself
Lack of ID is not cause in and of itself

He cannot take me to jail just to verify who I am using my prints, unless he has PC to detain me in the first place, which if I've never been printed, he STILL would not know who I am

Or, they can use something like AFIS/ABIS to the car to ID you, if your in the system

Sent from iPhone

[RickD427]

At one time California did have a law that required folks to present identification to peace officers upon demand.

The law was challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court and was held to be unconstitutional (refer to Kohlender v Lawson).

Other states have enacted similar "Stop and ID" statutes that have passed constitutional tests. Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District of Nevada is probably the best treatment given to a constitutional "Stop and ID" law.

California has not yet re-enacted a "Stop and ID" law.

One prominent law enforcement resource, recently serving as a special counsel to the L.A. County District Attorney, has advocated that officers could lawfully arrest a person refusing to identify themselves under Penal Code section 148 (Obstructing or Delaying a PO). He argued that Hiibel created a duty for a person to identify themself and that refusal to perform that duty would violate 148. I don't agree. Hiibel tested a Nevada statute that isn't authoritative in California.

At the same time, it is wise to possess ID when out and about. If for some reason you find yourself arrested, even for a very minor traffic violation, the presentation of ID will make a release on citation possible. If you lack ID, then plan on a trip to jail.

[Garrett128]

In California, the only time you are required to show "satisfactory evidence of identification" is when you commit a Vehicle Code violation (40302VC).

But as RickD stated above, if you commit another Code violation, having ID could be the difference between being released on a citation or taken in.

[TRICKSTER]

In California, the only time you are required to show "satisfactory evidence of identification" is when you commit a Vehicle Code violation (40302VC).

But as RickD stated above, if you commit another Code violation, having ID could be the difference between being released on a citation or taken in.

If you want to be cite released for any infraction or misdemeanor the officer can require that you provide "satisfactory evidence of identification". It is not restricted to the Vehicle Code. PENAL CODE SECTION 853.5-853.85

[CBR_rider]

If you want to be cite released for any infraction or misdemeanor the officer can require that you provide "satisfactory evidence of identification". It is not restricted to the Vehicle Code. PENAL CODE SECTION 853.5-853.85

Not much more to add...

[FresnoRob]

Your statement kind of contradicts itself
Lack of ID is not cause in and of itself

He cannot take me to jail just to verify who I am using my prints, unless he has PC to detain me in the first place, which if I've never been printed, he STILL would not know who I am

Or, they can use something like AFIS/ABIS to the car to ID you, if your in the system

Sent from iPhone

Maybe worded it poorly my point was the lack of ID wasn't the cause.
The cause could be anything, trespassing for instance. If that was the cause and your identity can not be determined plan on a trip down town.