[*BCM*] Just got "pulled over" for running a red on Mass. Ave.

[Jim Leonard]

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 04:19:27PM +0000, rawillis3 at juno.com wrote:
> The Supreme Court in 2004 in a 5-4 decision called Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt County, et al., 542 U.S. 177 (2004) -- and you can readily guess who were the five and who were the four --, ruled that a state statute requiring a person to identify him/herself to police in the course of an "investigatory stop," where the officer has a "reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity," does not violate Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure or Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.  Is a traffic stop "investigatory"?
> 
> Hiibel was a considerable erosion from what had been the law under an earlier decision called Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968), which said you did not have to answer any questions at all.  But even in Hiibel, the court did not say that you could be required to produce physical identification, simply state your name.
> 
> Also, judging a catalogue of "stop and identify" statutes in a footnote in the Hiibel decision, it would appear that Massachusetts does not have such a statute, though maybe Cambridge has an ordinance.
> 

I think you're mistating Hiibel (and I also may have in a previous post but in a different way).  Regardless, I don't think Hiibel applies here because it relates only to "Terry" stops.  

In citing a moving violation, Mass General Law (chapter 85: section 11c, Bicycle law violations; civil disposition; notice) states:  "A police officer taking cognizance of any such violation may request the offender to state his true name and address. Whoever, upon such request, refuses to state his name and address, or states a false name and address or a name and address which is not his name and address in ordinary use, shall be punished by a fine of not less than twenty nor more than fifty dollars. Any such offender so refusing to state his name and address may be arrested without a warrant, but no person shall be arrested without a warrant for any other such violation."

Note that this references a police officer citing someone after witnessing a violation rather than an officer stopping someone while investigating a possible violation.

--jim