Page 3 of 4

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:16 am
by WhyNot
Late last year I was traveling through a neighboring town, downtown daylight hours. A propane fill tanker truck let a SUV out of a gas station parking lot, the SUV proceeded to turn into oncoming traffic and surprise! couldn't see around that many tons tanker, and an oncoming big pickup and the SUV collided.
Since I was a witness, and knowing the law (unlike the propane truck driver :evil: who mysteriously didn't see anything, literally 2 feet from his left right headlight & mashed the gas peddle) I along w/others stopped to render assistance etc.

Shorten it up the Patrolmen i.e. several cruisers showed up, ambulance on the way etc. After I 1st notified I told the 1st Patrolman what I saw (including tanker license plate plackards etc :evil: ) where I was etc. ... To which he was totally unconcerned. , out came that same m&m notebook as my previous example (LoL). He never asked for ID or CHL card.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:14 pm
by KenB22
I have interacted multiple times with law enforcement over the years. This includes OSHP, Sherrif’s department and local police. No, I am not a felon. One was for a break-in at my office. One for a break-in at my home. One a robbery at a rest stop on I-71. Couple times for traffic accidents when I was hit and a couple times for driving while late. Each time I was armed and notified and I have NEVER been asked to produce my CHL. Most of the times the officer seemed exasperated as he had to delay what he was doing to listen to my spiel.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:43 am
by FormerNavy
Had two Butler County probation officers stop by my house one day, following up on old addresses for someone they were looking for. I notified them that I was carrying.... they never asked to see my ID nor my CHL and even allowed me to go back in the house to get a number for them.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:20 am
by WY_Not
I would hope so. :roll: THEIR only other option was to have the door closed in their faces.
FormerNavy wrote:Had two Butler County probation officers stop by my house one day, following up on old addresses for someone they were looking for. I notified them that I was carrying.... they never asked to see my ID nor my CHL and even allowed me to go back in the house to get a number for them.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:11 pm
by Brian D.
MrMagoo, have you gotten a meeting scheduled on this yet?

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:55 am
by Cygnus
In Ohio, and most other states, you are absolutely under no legal obligation to produce your ID unless the officer can articulate suspicion that you've committed a crime, or unless you've been lawfully arrested. Period. If you are driving, and the officer just pulls you over because he doesn't like the way you look, you have no obligation to produce id unless he can state the traffic violation he's pulled you over for. If you are a passenger in a vehicle, you do not have to produce id. They will most likely tell you that they can arrest you for failure to id, but they're full of poo poo. No such law exists. I had some morbidly obese cop get in my face a few years ago because I did not notify him that I had a ccw permit, but not carrying at the time after he claimed I rolled through a stop sign. In 36 years of driving, it was my first ticket. He was livid that I didn't notify him, and claimed he could arrest me. I extended both hands, and said 'go ahead'. He walked away,

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:29 am
by MyWifeSaidYes
Cygnus wrote:In Ohio, and most other states, you are absolutely under no legal obligation to produce your ID unless the officer can articulate suspicion that you've committed a crime, or unless you've been lawfully arrested. Period.
Agreed, the officer must have RAS (Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion), but there is no requirement that they must articulate their suspicion to YOU. :wink: They only need to explain themselves to the judge.

Also, in R.C 2921.29, Ohio sets out several situations where disclosure of your identity IS required. You'll notice that suspecting you 'may have committed a crime' and 'about to commit a crime' are included, as well as suspicion that you simply witnessed a felony (or an attempt or conspiracy thereof).

That's a whole lot for a LEO to work with...in Ohio.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 7:53 am
by JustaShooter
MyWifeSaidYes wrote:
Cygnus wrote:In Ohio, and most other states, you are absolutely under no legal obligation to produce your ID unless the officer can articulate suspicion that you've committed a crime, or unless you've been lawfully arrested. Period.
Agreed, the officer must have RAS (Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion), but there is no requirement that they must articulate their suspicion to YOU. :wink: They only need to explain themselves to the judge.

Also, in R.C 2921.29, Ohio sets out several situations where disclosure of your identity IS required. You'll notice that suspecting you 'may have committed a crime' and 'about to commit a crime' are included, as well as suspicion that you simply witnessed a felony (or an attempt or conspiracy thereof).

That's a whole lot for a LEO to work with...in Ohio.
Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:09 pm
by Brian D.
JustaShooter wrote:Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.
We've had a pretty long discussion about "and" versus "or" in that part of the law. I know how it reads, (the way you typed it is correct) but we would very likely find LOTS of LE folks who vigorously insist that the law requires a subject to provide all three.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:59 pm
by JustaShooter
Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.
We've had a pretty long discussion about "and" versus "or" in that part of the law. I know how it reads, (the way you typed it is correct) but we would very likely find LOTS of LE folks who vigorously insist that the law requires a subject to provide all three.
Agreed - and I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that a judge would agree also.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:46 pm
by schmieg
JustaShooter wrote:
Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.
We've had a pretty long discussion about "and" versus "or" in that part of the law. I know how it reads, (the way you typed it is correct) but we would very likely find LOTS of LE folks who vigorously insist that the law requires a subject to provide all three.
Agreed - and I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that a judge would agree also.
Nothing stops the officer from asking your name and then your address and then your date of birth or any combination of the three. It isn't a choose one and lose all other options for the officer.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:33 pm
by rimfireOH
schmieg wrote:Nothing stops the officer from asking your name and then your address and then your date of birth or any combination of the three. It isn't a choose one and lose all other options for the officer.
Once upon a time (before I even knew about CHLs, 12/19/2004) in University Circle, after dark, in winter, we were geocaching in a public space (among the trees in the space that is now the Perkins Wildlife Center) and found a purse. We used a pay phone to call the campus police, waited for them to show up, observed that they noted my dad's license plate (visiting from out of state) before they exited their vehicle and approached us. Both my hands were out of my pockets, holding the purse. I introduced myself and they asked for name and address (don't remember if they wanted my DOB). They gave my dad the run-through, too.

I explained the situation, told them where and when we found it (and what we were doing) and gave them the purse. They got on the radio, squawked a bit, then came over and asked me for my SSN. What!? Yep, my SSN. That was past the limit of my cooperation. I asked them why they needed that and was told "in case the person whose purse it was wanted to contact" me. Yeah, right.

My dad and I started backing away. We were done. Did more than most people would do, probably, but I'm not handing out my SSN. I know that this is just my perception (not reality), but I distinctly remember (to this day) feeling presumed guilty and not presumed innocent.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:47 pm
by welshj
Had an interesting interaction the other day...

Coming home from work on a rural state route, a lady was standing in the road next to her older blazer.
She was waving at me, and appeared to be hysterical.
Just a 100? yards? before seeing her, the dog warden's truck was pulled in a drive with a young guy standing, leaning, at the passenger side.

I passed her widely, and decided i was stopping. Pulled over and walked back
She was crying hysterically, sobbing and explained that her boyfriend had jumped out of her moving vehicle during an arguement and then she ran out of gas. Ok....

As i stood there, two county sherriffs cars pulled up, lights and sirens going.

Sherriff approached, asked the lady if she was ok while eyeballing me... the whole time.
After she said yes, asked who i was.

I told him i "had just stopped, she had been in the road and i moved her to the side.
Didn't see or know anything more than he did."

Next words were- " I have a CHL, and I'm currently armed officer."

He nodded, turned to her and stepped between us, back to me... to get further info from her.
After calming her down, and several minutes later- he asked me for my ID "in case we need to contact you for any reason, which is really doubtful though." Handed him my license and CHL.

He took both, handed back the CHL without looking at it long, said "don't need that, thanks"
Took down my name and adress, gave me my license and told me i was free to go and thanks for stopping for her.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 4:21 pm
by Werz
JustaShooter wrote:
Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.
We've had a pretty long discussion about "and" versus "or" in that part of the law. I know how it reads, (the way you typed it is correct) but we would very likely find LOTS of LE folks who vigorously insist that the law requires a subject to provide all three.
Agreed - and I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that a judge would agree also.
schmieg wrote:Nothing stops the officer from asking your name and then your address and then your date of birth or any combination of the three. It isn't a choose one and lose all other options for the officer.
Exactly. The way it was typed was correct, but it was not complete. The actual statute reads: " No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth ..." R.C. 2912.19(A). Any rational person will parse that so that you are committing a violation if you [1] refuse to disclose your name, OR [2] refuse to disclose your address, OR [3] refuse to disclose your date of birth. Any appellate court in Ohio would agree with that interpretation, and the Ohio Supreme Court would never grant jurisdiction over the silliness of the alternative interpretation. There is a big difference between between vagueness and creative interpretation.

Re: Interaction with LEOs

Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:29 am
by Cygnus
Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Agreed, MYSY - but notice there is no requirement to *produce* ID under that statute, only that you provide name, address, or date of birth when requested.
We've had a pretty long discussion about "and" versus "or" in that part of the law. I know how it reads, (the way you typed it is correct) but we would very likely find LOTS of LE folks who vigorously insist that the law requires a subject to provide all three.

It seriously deflates their bloated egos when you state the law and decline their request for an ID