Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer, blah blah blah
You should watch this video before reading [this] article, anyway; it’s necessary context.

(I have reduced the grammar to make the reading more obvious; the underline has been added for emphasis on the key phrase. You may click on the citation to view the full/original verbiage online.)

Alabama Code § 15-5-30A [cop], acting within their [jurisdiction,] may stop any person abroad in a public place [with "reasonable suspicion" of a current/recent/upcoming crime,] and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his actions.

I currently don’t yet even know whether it’s an open question as to whether one is obligated to answer these demands in Alabama.

  • According to a post on 2017-01-12 by ohwilleke, a highly-ranked (top 1%) user on Law Stack Exchange, New York's identical legislation means that “the officer is…entitled to determine the information that an ID would reveal”.
  • A post later that same day by another highly-ranked (top 4%) user Cicero points out that the law “just says the officer "may demand" a name and address. It does not say the person must provide it.”, and further observes that “there is no penalty listed” for failing to provide the demanded ID.

Neither of these users, however, cited any precedent indicating that their interpretations agree with the canonical/authoritative ones; e.g. it’s not clear (to me) whether any explicit penalty has to be listed, or if one could/would just be charged with Obstructing an Officer, if such a refusal would in-itself upgrade “reasonable suspicion” to “probable cause” and initiate an outright arrest (including a full belongings-search), etc.

I’d love to see what precedent, clarifying/related laws, etc. apply to this—it's certainly hard to follow a rule when you can’t even figure out what the legally-mandated exceptions are.

This certainly seems like it would be important to work out if one’s ever planning on walking around looking like they’re on the Wrong Side of the Matrix (disheveled, keeping odd hours, video-recording police abuse, etc.)—obviously, none of this applies to one properly bathed and clearly engaged in consumerism or on the way to/from an engineering job site; the issue is being criminalized anyway for ever stepping outside of The Script in a non-criminal way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *