Can you be arrested and convicted simply for

[Yax]

resisting arrest?

My brother was once arrested for resisting arrest, but no other crime. Well, he was riding in a car with my uncle who got pulled over. The cops asked him for his driver's license after they asked my uncle for one. My brother was not old enough to drive and didn't have one so he said that even if he did have one he didn't need to show it since he was not driving. With that, they pulled him out of the car, then they arrested him for resisting arrest.

My dad had to go pick him up, but the charges were dropped once they found out that he really was too young to have a license.

The question is, had he been over 18, would the charges hold up in court?

 

[Gunslinger08]

No.

 

[Encryptic]

That's an interesting question. I think they'd have to charge you with something else first (i.e. the charge you're being arrested for in the first place) before you could actually be said to be resisting arrest. ::shrug::

 

[Yossarian]

(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

 

I think they would hold up. If the cops need to ID you, and you own an official ID, I'm pretty sure you're required to produce it upon request.

EDIT: but I'm not sure that resisting arrest is the proper charge...possibly obstruction?

 

[NogginBoink]

Yes, you can be convicted of resisting arrest.

You can also be arrested for failing to show identification to a police officer. (Your brother was wrong. If asked to show ID, you have to, whether or not you're driving, I believe.)

This particular set of circumstances, however, is odd. I don't see how he could resist arrest when the officer wasn't attempting to arrest him.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

(3) but they can't arrest you for resisting arrest without a charge to originally arrest you for

 

[dartworth]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

Are you sure about that?


Papers please!

 

[Yax]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

The point was, he didn't have an ID. He was just a teenager at the time and you know how teens are. The cops were too dumb to realize that he looked a little young to be over 18 and they didn't believe my uncle either. They had to wait till my dad showed up with paper to prove his age. Well, they were small town cops with nothing better to do I guess.

 

[Vic]

Woohoo... corrupt cops in action! :disgust:

Unfortunately, yes, the charges may have held up in court even though your brother was right about not having to carry ID. The reality in our "free" country is that a cop can shoot you dead for no reason and get away with it if he wanted to, and some do. Hell, a cop did that here locally a couple of months ago and if she hadn't been black, no one would have cared.

 

Originally posted by: cheapbidder01

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

The point was, he didn't have an ID. He was just a teenager at the time and you know how teens are. The cops were too dumb to realize that he looked a little young to be over 18 and they didn't believe my uncle either. They had to wait till my dad showed up with paper to prove his age. Well, they were small town cops with nothing better to do I guess.

No, that's not the point. You asked if the charges would hold up had he been 18. At 18, he would most likely have some form of official ID. If he didn't have one, then the cops would have to do a verbal ID and have the dispatchers look up the name he gives them in their LEIN computer. Either way, your brother is required to give the police the requested information...in this case, his ID.

 

[Rogue]

First off, no, you cannot simply "sue them massively" for it. I'm sick and tired of you jackasses even using the word "sue" with little or no real understanding of what it fully entails. Second, I'm am almost certain that he probably did not simply tell them he had no license. He must have done it in a manner which brought attention to himself. Fact is, we will never really know.

To answer your question though, yes, resisting arrest is a legal offense, which if articulated and proven properly can and will result in jail time. What everyone seems to not realize is that a case is most often made or broken simply by how the officer articulates and describes the incident in question and what other corroborating evidence goes along with it.

 

[yukichigai]

Originally posted by: Encryptic
That's an interesting question. I think they'd have to charge you with something else first (i.e. the charge you're being arrested for in the first place) before you could actually be said to be resisting arrest. ::shrug::

Yes, resisting arrest implies arrest for another suspected charge. An instance could theoretically arise where someone is suspected of something, resists arrest and is caught, but the first charge is cleared while the resisting arrest charge stands. Also, it might be that the equivalent of "Failure to cooperate with a law enforcement officer" is covered by "resisting arrest" in that particular jurisdiction.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

Ask. You are not required to produce or show ID unless the officer has a valid cause, i.e. you're driving, in a restricted area, or are suspected of a crime. It is your constitutional right that you don't even have to speak a single word or answer a single question to an officer if you don't want to. edit: and that includes not being forced to indentify oneself. If an officer tells you not identifying yourself or not answering his questions is obstruction (and they frequently do say this), he is lying. If they try to arrest you for not cooperating (and they can), the best course of action is to go limp and yell loudly that you are not resisting arrest.

 

[Jzero]

From the ACLU wallet card:

2. You don't have to answer a police officer's questions, but you must show your driver's license and registration when stopped in a car. In other situations, you can't legally be arrested for refusing to identify yourself to a police officer.

I guess since he was in a car, the cop was in the right...note that it doesn't say if you were driving.

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

I'm allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time. Doesn't mean they have to show it to me.

 

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

Ask. You are not required to produce or show ID unless the officer has a valid cause, i.e. you're driving, in a restricted area, or are suspected of a crime. It is your constitutional right that you don't even have to speak a single word or answer a single question to an officer if you don't want to. edit: and that includes not being forced to indentify oneself.

Not according to post 2 above mine.

^
|
|
|

 

[Yax]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: cheapbidder01

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

The point was, he didn't have an ID. He was just a teenager at the time and you know how teens are. The cops were too dumb to realize that he looked a little young to be over 18 and they didn't believe my uncle either. They had to wait till my dad showed up with paper to prove his age. Well, they were small town cops with nothing better to do I guess.

No, that's not the point. You asked if the charges would hold up had he been 18. At 18, he would most likely have some form of official ID. If he didn't have one, then the cops would have to do a verbal ID and have the dispatchers look up the name he gives them in their LEIN computer. Either way, your brother is required to give the police the requested information...in this case, his ID.

You're right, but I was responding to the response.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

Ask. You are not required to produce or show ID unless the officer has a valid cause, i.e. you're driving, in a restricted area, or are suspected of a crime. It is your constitutional right that you don't even have to speak a single word or answer a single question to an officer if you don't want to. edit: and that includes not being forced to indentify oneself.

Not according to post 2 above mine.

^
|
|
|

And your posts are law?

You are completely wrong. If I choose to walk down a city street without ID, I may do so. If an officer asks for my ID, I am not required by law to present it to him. If he asks my name, I am not required to tell him. There are exceptions to this, of course, like if I were driving or in some type of restricted area (i.e. airport, etc) and depending on any local code, he may try to arrest me for vagrancy, but that's the worst he could do. He could attempt a charge of "resisting arrest" but that would be the falsified charge of a corrupt cop.
Now, being a law-abiding citizen, I would normally cooperate with the authorities, however I at least understand my rights enough to know that I would be doing so voluntarily.

edit: I see that you were referring to Jzero's post. That clearly refers to the driver and certainly not about minor passengers.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: PipBoy
(1) your brother is an idiot for arguing in that situation, and (2) cops are allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time.

I'm allowed to ask anyone for ID at any time. Doesn't mean they have to show it to me.

Well, this is covered under University rules, but when someone is on our campus, they're required to present ID when asked to by campus or city police. If they're in the dorms, they're required to comply with directions (within reason) given by University officials, RA's, CA's, etc.

 

[Jzero]

edit: I see that you were referring to Jzero's post. That clearly refers to the driver and certainly not about minor passengers.

I think if it was so "clear" it would have said "If you are stopped while driving a motor vehicle" as opposed to "stopped in a car." Additionally, if the kid doesn't LOOK under 18 and isn't carrying and ID, then it doesn't matter if minor passengers are excluded - the cop obviously didn't think he was a minor, which is exactly why the incident occurred.

 

[thraashman]

This sort of reminds me of something that happened to a friend of mine. She was driving and had 3 passengers who were all extremely drunk, but of legal drinking age. An officer pulled her over and told the passengers to get out of the car. She told them not to because unless they got out of the car he could not arrest them for public drunkeness. And since he had no valid reason to tell them to get out, they didn't have to. And although irritated, the cop had to let them go.