Are cops required by law to have “reasonable suspicion” in order to detain a person? If so, do they have to inform the detainee about the suspicion? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowIs there a minimum speed limit on US hwy 60 in OK? Are bicycles legal on US hwy 60 in OK?Why do cops make up funny stories when detaining people?What are the limits on police “qualified immunity”?When can a cop force a person to comply?What law determines when you have been ordered to pull over for a traffic stop?Hit during traffic stopTold by police that I'm being detained. No probable cause or statute/law given. Am I free to leave?Can a deaf person flee the police under a claim that the cop failed to detain them in an understandable manner?Does a citizen have to open the door to UK police if they do not give a reason?Is there any federal law in the US that protects its citizens from police harassment? Or is it up to the statesIs there a minimum speed limit on US hwy 60 in OK? Are bicycles legal on US hwy 60 in OK?How can I tell whether my 4th amendment rights have been violated?
Why do remote companies require working in the US?
Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?
Novel about a guy who is possessed by the divine essence and the world ends?
At which OSI layer a user-generated data resides?
How do scammers retract money, while you can’t?
Do I need to enable Dev Hub in my PROD Org?
Was a professor correct to chastise me for writing "Prof. X" rather than "Professor X"?
Sending manuscript to multiple publishers
Is it ever safe to open a suspicious html file (e.g. email attachment)?
How does the mv command work with external drives?
How to start emacs in "nothing" mode (`fundamental-mode`)
Which tube will fit a -(700 x 25c) wheel?
How to prove the convergence of the following series
What is ( CFMCC ) on ILS approach chart?
How did people program for Consoles with multiple CPUs?
If a black hole is created from light, can this black hole then move at speed of light?
Interfacing a button to MCU (and PC) with 50m long cable
Workaholic Formal/Informal
Should I tutor a student who I know has cheated on their homework?
SOQL: Aggregate, Grouping By and WHERE Clauses not working
Are there any limitations on attacking while grappling?
Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?
A "random" question: usage of "random" as adjective in Spanish
Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?
Are cops required by law to have “reasonable suspicion” in order to detain a person? If so, do they have to inform the detainee about the suspicion?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowIs there a minimum speed limit on US hwy 60 in OK? Are bicycles legal on US hwy 60 in OK?Why do cops make up funny stories when detaining people?What are the limits on police “qualified immunity”?When can a cop force a person to comply?What law determines when you have been ordered to pull over for a traffic stop?Hit during traffic stopTold by police that I'm being detained. No probable cause or statute/law given. Am I free to leave?Can a deaf person flee the police under a claim that the cop failed to detain them in an understandable manner?Does a citizen have to open the door to UK police if they do not give a reason?Is there any federal law in the US that protects its citizens from police harassment? Or is it up to the statesIs there a minimum speed limit on US hwy 60 in OK? Are bicycles legal on US hwy 60 in OK?How can I tell whether my 4th amendment rights have been violated?
I was stopped while cycling on hwy 59 in Texas, about 50 miles south of Huston.
Officer started asking me questions about my travels.
I asked: "Have I done anything illegal?
Officer: "No, but I need your ID"
I: Am I being detained?
Officer: No.
I: Am I free to go?
Officer: Hmm.. No.
I: Do you not have to have a "reasonable suspicion" to detein me?
Officer: No, I do not. I need to know who you are. What if a truck passes you by, and the wind draft pushes you into the ditch and you die. We need to know who to send the body to.
I thought he was joking, and I started to walk away. Then another officer came and said I had to show ID or he will arrest me.
I gave him my ID and I was on my way quickly.
My question is: Did the cops act illegally in any way there? Do they or do they not have to have a reasonable suspicion to detain people on the road?
I love cycling my way to wherever I need to go. I comply even with what I consider illegal requests from cops, but it is getting aggravating after too many encounters.
I wrote a few emails to the state, but no answer 😕
Edit:
I tried ACLU and same, no answer, no reply. I tried to simply tell cops "NO, it's not ok" and I got arrested for obstructing an officer (I have a question about it here ) I tried cycling south of the US-MX border. That seems to have worked great :)
united-states constitutional-law police texas
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
add a comment |
I was stopped while cycling on hwy 59 in Texas, about 50 miles south of Huston.
Officer started asking me questions about my travels.
I asked: "Have I done anything illegal?
Officer: "No, but I need your ID"
I: Am I being detained?
Officer: No.
I: Am I free to go?
Officer: Hmm.. No.
I: Do you not have to have a "reasonable suspicion" to detein me?
Officer: No, I do not. I need to know who you are. What if a truck passes you by, and the wind draft pushes you into the ditch and you die. We need to know who to send the body to.
I thought he was joking, and I started to walk away. Then another officer came and said I had to show ID or he will arrest me.
I gave him my ID and I was on my way quickly.
My question is: Did the cops act illegally in any way there? Do they or do they not have to have a reasonable suspicion to detain people on the road?
I love cycling my way to wherever I need to go. I comply even with what I consider illegal requests from cops, but it is getting aggravating after too many encounters.
I wrote a few emails to the state, but no answer 😕
Edit:
I tried ACLU and same, no answer, no reply. I tried to simply tell cops "NO, it's not ok" and I got arrested for obstructing an officer (I have a question about it here ) I tried cycling south of the US-MX border. That seems to have worked great :)
united-states constitutional-law police texas
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
1
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
1
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
1
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48
add a comment |
I was stopped while cycling on hwy 59 in Texas, about 50 miles south of Huston.
Officer started asking me questions about my travels.
I asked: "Have I done anything illegal?
Officer: "No, but I need your ID"
I: Am I being detained?
Officer: No.
I: Am I free to go?
Officer: Hmm.. No.
I: Do you not have to have a "reasonable suspicion" to detein me?
Officer: No, I do not. I need to know who you are. What if a truck passes you by, and the wind draft pushes you into the ditch and you die. We need to know who to send the body to.
I thought he was joking, and I started to walk away. Then another officer came and said I had to show ID or he will arrest me.
I gave him my ID and I was on my way quickly.
My question is: Did the cops act illegally in any way there? Do they or do they not have to have a reasonable suspicion to detain people on the road?
I love cycling my way to wherever I need to go. I comply even with what I consider illegal requests from cops, but it is getting aggravating after too many encounters.
I wrote a few emails to the state, but no answer 😕
Edit:
I tried ACLU and same, no answer, no reply. I tried to simply tell cops "NO, it's not ok" and I got arrested for obstructing an officer (I have a question about it here ) I tried cycling south of the US-MX border. That seems to have worked great :)
united-states constitutional-law police texas
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
I was stopped while cycling on hwy 59 in Texas, about 50 miles south of Huston.
Officer started asking me questions about my travels.
I asked: "Have I done anything illegal?
Officer: "No, but I need your ID"
I: Am I being detained?
Officer: No.
I: Am I free to go?
Officer: Hmm.. No.
I: Do you not have to have a "reasonable suspicion" to detein me?
Officer: No, I do not. I need to know who you are. What if a truck passes you by, and the wind draft pushes you into the ditch and you die. We need to know who to send the body to.
I thought he was joking, and I started to walk away. Then another officer came and said I had to show ID or he will arrest me.
I gave him my ID and I was on my way quickly.
My question is: Did the cops act illegally in any way there? Do they or do they not have to have a reasonable suspicion to detain people on the road?
I love cycling my way to wherever I need to go. I comply even with what I consider illegal requests from cops, but it is getting aggravating after too many encounters.
I wrote a few emails to the state, but no answer 😕
Edit:
I tried ACLU and same, no answer, no reply. I tried to simply tell cops "NO, it's not ok" and I got arrested for obstructing an officer (I have a question about it here ) I tried cycling south of the US-MX border. That seems to have worked great :)
united-states constitutional-law police texas
united-states constitutional-law police texas
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
edited 16 mins ago
Alex Doe
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
asked Feb 9 at 19:34
Alex DoeAlex Doe
2028
2028
1
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
1
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
1
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48
add a comment |
1
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
1
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
1
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48
1
1
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
1
1
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
1
1
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed or about to be committed, then there is no reason to seize you, and the Fourth Amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". Even if a state has a "stop and identify" statute, reasonable suspicion is a minimum requirement for seizing your person, even temporarily. Texas is not a state with an obligation to identify statute.
I would not expect the state to be very helpful, given the facts as you report them. There might be others, such as the ACLU, who may be happy to discuss the particulars of your case. The police need to justify a stop in court, and not to the person being seized. I don't know if there is any case law saying that a false police statement to a detainee ("No, I don't have a reasonable suspicion") precludes claiming in court that there was reasonable suspicion, but it should at least make the claim of reasonable suspicion less credible. They do have to have reasonable suspicion, and they do not have to tell you what that suspicion is. OTOH if they are just harassing bicyclists, that would be illegal.
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
|
show 8 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37057%2fare-cops-required-by-law-to-have-reasonable-suspicion-in-order-to-detain-a-per%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed or about to be committed, then there is no reason to seize you, and the Fourth Amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". Even if a state has a "stop and identify" statute, reasonable suspicion is a minimum requirement for seizing your person, even temporarily. Texas is not a state with an obligation to identify statute.
I would not expect the state to be very helpful, given the facts as you report them. There might be others, such as the ACLU, who may be happy to discuss the particulars of your case. The police need to justify a stop in court, and not to the person being seized. I don't know if there is any case law saying that a false police statement to a detainee ("No, I don't have a reasonable suspicion") precludes claiming in court that there was reasonable suspicion, but it should at least make the claim of reasonable suspicion less credible. They do have to have reasonable suspicion, and they do not have to tell you what that suspicion is. OTOH if they are just harassing bicyclists, that would be illegal.
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
|
show 8 more comments
If there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed or about to be committed, then there is no reason to seize you, and the Fourth Amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". Even if a state has a "stop and identify" statute, reasonable suspicion is a minimum requirement for seizing your person, even temporarily. Texas is not a state with an obligation to identify statute.
I would not expect the state to be very helpful, given the facts as you report them. There might be others, such as the ACLU, who may be happy to discuss the particulars of your case. The police need to justify a stop in court, and not to the person being seized. I don't know if there is any case law saying that a false police statement to a detainee ("No, I don't have a reasonable suspicion") precludes claiming in court that there was reasonable suspicion, but it should at least make the claim of reasonable suspicion less credible. They do have to have reasonable suspicion, and they do not have to tell you what that suspicion is. OTOH if they are just harassing bicyclists, that would be illegal.
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
|
show 8 more comments
If there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed or about to be committed, then there is no reason to seize you, and the Fourth Amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". Even if a state has a "stop and identify" statute, reasonable suspicion is a minimum requirement for seizing your person, even temporarily. Texas is not a state with an obligation to identify statute.
I would not expect the state to be very helpful, given the facts as you report them. There might be others, such as the ACLU, who may be happy to discuss the particulars of your case. The police need to justify a stop in court, and not to the person being seized. I don't know if there is any case law saying that a false police statement to a detainee ("No, I don't have a reasonable suspicion") precludes claiming in court that there was reasonable suspicion, but it should at least make the claim of reasonable suspicion less credible. They do have to have reasonable suspicion, and they do not have to tell you what that suspicion is. OTOH if they are just harassing bicyclists, that would be illegal.
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
If there is no reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed or about to be committed, then there is no reason to seize you, and the Fourth Amendment "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". Even if a state has a "stop and identify" statute, reasonable suspicion is a minimum requirement for seizing your person, even temporarily. Texas is not a state with an obligation to identify statute.
I would not expect the state to be very helpful, given the facts as you report them. There might be others, such as the ACLU, who may be happy to discuss the particulars of your case. The police need to justify a stop in court, and not to the person being seized. I don't know if there is any case law saying that a false police statement to a detainee ("No, I don't have a reasonable suspicion") precludes claiming in court that there was reasonable suspicion, but it should at least make the claim of reasonable suspicion less credible. They do have to have reasonable suspicion, and they do not have to tell you what that suspicion is. OTOH if they are just harassing bicyclists, that would be illegal.
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
answered Feb 9 at 20:14
user6726user6726
61.2k455106
61.2k455106
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
|
show 8 more comments
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
1
1
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
If the cop was indeed harassing the OP who then took him to court, what punishment would the cop get and for what offence?
– Greendrake
Feb 9 at 22:33
2
2
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
This would be a civil rights violation; the officer could be civilly liable, except that the court would probably not find that the officer had been "put on notice" w.r.t. the action, so he would have qualified immunity (and thus no consequence for the officer). I'm not saying that it would be pointless: the point could be to get a ruling that results in a change of policy and does put officers on notice.
– user6726
Feb 9 at 23:41
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Have any idea why they are not required by law to tell you the real reason for stopping?
– Alex Doe
Feb 10 at 0:51
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
Because the Texas legislature has not passed a law which forces police to answer that question. It is within their power to do so, but have not. On Politics SE they might give details about why, but it's essentially because there is no political demand for such a change in the law.
– user6726
Feb 10 at 0:56
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
@AlexDoe the meaning of "the police need to justify a stop in court" is that the best chance you have of getting them to describe why they've stopped you is to do something to get yourself arrested and charged. Then, in your defense against the charge, you challenge the stop as illegal, forcing the police to justify it. The other negative consequences of this approach, however, most likely far outweigh any benefit you might perceive in forcing the police to describe why they stopped you.
– phoog
Feb 10 at 5:27
|
show 8 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37057%2fare-cops-required-by-law-to-have-reasonable-suspicion-in-order-to-detain-a-per%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
It is obvious if nothing else that the cops were jerks. Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement. In some states and situations, cyclists may need to identify themselves - which could mean verbally identify yourself (e.g., "I am Alex Doe, of 1234 Main Street, Huston, TX").
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:25
1
It is completely legal to make bogus threats of arrest and then never carry them out.
– emory
Feb 10 at 2:26
@emory "Cyclists never need to show ID to law enforcement." That's ridiculous. Cyclists are bound by traffic laws and can get traffic tickets, and when they're issued traffic tickets, cops can ask for ID. There are lots of other situations where thwy would be required to show ID.
– Acccumulation
Mar 11 at 17:07
@Acccumulation I wouldn't always be so sure in Texas. You do NOT need a license to operate a bicycle in Texas. Hence, people riding bicycles do not have to show their ID. In Texas if you're not under arrest you do not have to identify yourself. Even if you are under arrest in Texas, you can identify yourself verbally with your name, birthdate and address. You may not lie to the officer, but doing what I said would be sufficient in this case. If you are not under arrest you won't need to identify yourself.
– mark b
Mar 11 at 19:13
1
@Acccumulation Yes cops can ask for ID when they issue traffic tickets to cyclists. They can ask for anything they want. Asking implies you have the right to refuse.
– emory
Mar 11 at 19:48