2 LTCH holders arrested

[KG1]

Imagine this. Cop asks person a what's your name, the person is silent as is his right. The cop then asks, what is your friends name. When the person is still silent, viola, failure to aid an officer charge.

Yeah this whole thing seems to be just not right.

I guess you could get run in with "refusal to aid an officer" for not assisting him in trying to find out if you are doing something illegal or not.

 

[CathyInBlue]

That seems to be the gist of the case at hand. Apparently, IC can countermand the 5th Amendment.

 

[stephen87]

That's what I was getting at. It was an attempt by the officer to get them on something. Most likely they didn't ID themselves or hand over their LTCH and when searching them for transport he found their LTCHs and decided to try to get something to stick. It will likely go away after a court battle but fit will also help clearly define what is meant, hopefully.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

That seems to be the gist of the case at hand. Apparently, IC can countermand the 5th Amendment.

Not exactly. This hasn't been to court yet and there is still the 'reasonable cause' clause that you can statutorily refuse and not be found guilty.

Though one of the (very) few examples of case law we found on the issue does NOT raise any of our hopes.

 

[Roscoe38]

Not sure about the legality of that arrest, though I'm not the confrontational type. I don't think you HAVE to carry your permit, but I always do and I automatically give it to the officer along with my DL if asked.

If you are packing you must also pack your permit,
Just like when you drive, you must have your DL on person or in vehicle

 

[Titanium_Frost]

If you are packing you must also pack your permit,
Just like when you drive, you must have your DL on person or in vehicle

Please cite the IC or gunshop where you are getting your information at.

 

[Archaic_Entity]

Please cite the IC or gunshop where you are getting your information at.

You know he got it from not reading upthread.

If you are packing you must also pack your permit,
Just like when you drive, you must have your DL on person or in vehicle

I heard that any time you pack you should use packing tape.

 

[Valvestate]

I heard that any time you pack you should use packing tape.

Don't forget to pack the bacon!

 

[Double T]

If you provide LTCH and you are not driving, that is identifying yourself AND providing your license to carry.

No need to show driver's license unless you were driving a motor vehicle.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

No need to show driver's license unless you were driving a motor vehicle.

Just to have this said ONE MORE TIME.

Unless you are OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE you are never required to show your DRIVERS license to a LEO in the sate of Indiana. If you are required to ID yourself for an infraction or ordiance violation then name, DOB and address are suffecient to meet the requirements of state law.

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

 

[jedi]

i would be armed if i was picking up trash there too

Why? This did not occur in a "bad" part of LAKE COUNTY.

 

[KLB]

Why? This did not occur in a "bad" part of LAKE COUNTY.

It is a "bad" part of Porter County.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Why? This did not occur in a "bad" part of LAKE COUNTY.

Is there a "good" part?

 

[Archaic_Entity]

Just to have this said ONE MORE TIME.

Unless you are OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE you are never required to show your DRIVERS license to a LEO in the sate of Indiana. If you are required to ID yourself for an infraction or ordiance violation then name, DOB and address are suffecient to meet the requirements of state law.

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

The one thing that I'm slightly unclear about with this part of the IC is the "if in the person's possession" portion.

I understand that I can supply (1), but is (2) supposed to supersede (1) if it is in my possession? Otherwise, why would that addendum be necessary.

 

[Double T]

No. Name addy and date of birth, if you haven't commited an infraction you do not have to show license.

I also have my DLN memorized, so I don't even have to pull it

 

[Rookie]

No. Name addy and date of birth, if you haven't commited an infraction you do not have to show license.

I also have my DLN memorized, so I don't even have to pull it

So do I.

 

[Bill B]

Is there a "good" part?

South of the Kankakee river

 

[stephen87]

Count me as the cool kid group, I know mine as well.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I've wondered that myself, Archaic, but I think the use of "or" in lieu of "and" makes (1) and (2) independently available. Manifestly, I cannot present my DL if I do not immediately possess it, but even if I physicly possess it, it is still my choice whether to satisfy the requirement to ID to authorities via (1) or (2).

If there is statute in the IC which states something stupid like "OR" and "AND" are to interpretted as interchangeable (as the Terre Haute city code does), then that might be wrong. Manifestly, the presentation of a DL is accompanied by the presentation of name/addr/dob.

 

[KG1]

No. Name addy and date of birth, if you haven't commited an infraction you do not have to show license.

I also have my DLN memorized, so I don't even have to pull it

So do I.

Count me as the cool kid group, I know mine as well.

I'm still working on memorizing name/address/dob.