Law Trivia and Discussions

[tvc184]

41 minutes ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

What's the law about driving in the left lane for passing only?

There is no law that specifically says that you can only drive in the left most lane to pass… except where there are signs on some highways that state that the left lane is for passing only such as some areas of IH10 between Beaumont and Houston and Beaumont the Orange.

However…

There are a couple of laws that “may” be violated by driving in the far left lane. Such as:

(b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:

(1) passing another vehicle; or

(2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

It doesn’t say that you can’t drive in the left lane. It basically says that you can’t obstruct traffic.  Notice how it describes it. It doesn’t mention speed limits. I see a lot of people claim that if driving the speed limit, they can choose their lane. I think the law disagrees. For one thing, nowhere in Texas law does it give citizens the authority to enforce traffic laws. A person can’t obstruct traffic under his own assumed authority. Secondly, how does a person know that his speed is correct?

 Back to the wording of the law, notice that it says moving slower than the normal speed of other vehicles “at the time and place”. Obstructing traffic is what causes many accidents and probably road rage. Again, it doesn’t say anything about the speed limit.

My explanation is, if people are passing you to the right, you are breaking the law and subject to arrest. Do officers use that option? Not very often as there are bigger fish to catch.

So, if it is 2:00am and you are the only person driving in that area and driving in the left lane… there is no law against it (unless there is the aforementioned sign) since you aren’t driving slower than the traffic in that area… because there is none. If you were in the left lane, and they were people behind you, but you were steadily passing cars to the right, again there’s no law against that because you’re moving faster than the normal flow of traffic at that time in that location.

I have never issued a citation for that but I have pulled people over for it. Hopefully, I scared them and cost them enough time that they will think before doing it again… But I doubt it.

There is another law that says something about a highway with three or more lanes, you will not drive in the left lane. The traffic code is absolutely the hardest code to look up laws though and I don’t feel like digging that one out right now.  

[tvc184]

Sometime citizens and even the police officers make mistakes about the law because they will look at a section and come to the conclusion that this law clearly says that a person is not guilty. True…

But is there another law that applies?

I was at an incident one time where a drunk had pulled into his or a relative’s yard. The guy then got ready to leave and drove on a circle driveway (it actually went around the house) and ran over a small child like 2-3 years old. I don’t remember if the child was critically injured or died. Since it was a major crime scene, I showed up as a sergeant/supervisor , along with my lieutenant/commander and a senior officer. They started talking about taking the guy into custody for a DWI and Intoxication Assault or potentially Intoxication Manslaughter if the child died.

I shut that discussion down, saying that intoxicated driving laws don’t apply to a private yard. They went something like… Uh Oh, now what do we do, he didn’t violate the driving laws!!

My answer was like, “Hey guys, forget the traffic laws”.

Assault is intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing injury. I would say that driving over a child because you were too intoxicated to notice would definitely be reckless. Aggravated Assault is to commit an assault but uses a deadly weapon (vehicle) or causes serious bodily injury. This guy in my opinion committed Agg Assault both ways.

 The point is that just because one law may not have been violated, another law may have been broken. 

 

[WOSdrummer99]

2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

except where there are signs on some highways that state that the left lane is for passing only such as some areas of IH10 between Beaumont and Houston and Beaumont the Orange.

That's what I was referring to. Thanks for the lesson.

[rupert3]

Man you are a wealth of knowledge and wisdom.  Thank you so much

[SmashMouth]

Thanks to @tvc184, this is the most interesting topic in any forum on the website. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

[tvc184]

Thanks. I just came back from teaching at the citizen police academy.  

[tvc184]

An officer is responding to an emergency call.

 The officer is speeding and then runs a stop sign but doesn’t use his emergency lights and/or siren.

Is it lawful for a police officer to violate those traffic laws without using emergency equipment?

[rupert3]

Once again just guessing, but I think if he is on a silent call then yes, it is lawful.  But then again, I may watch too much TV.

[tvc184]

5 hours ago, rupert3 said:

Once again just guessing, but I think if he is on a silent call then yes, it is lawful.  But then again, I may watch too much TV.

That would be correct. It is officer discretion on how to respond to calls while considering the traffic conditions, the type of call like a break-in (burglary) and you want to be able to catch the suspect instead of warning him, etc.

Other emergency vehicles such as fire department and EMS must comply with emergency equipment laws.

[tvc184]

In the same line of questions….

Fire

Police

EMS

 When  not on any emergency calls (going back to the station, heading to eat lunch/donuts, etc ), do they have a speed limit? 

[SmashMouth]

45 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

In the same line of questions….

Fire

Police

EMS

 When  not on any emergency calls (going back to the station, heading to eat lunch/donuts, etc ), do they have a speed limit? 

I presume they have to obey the posted speed limit. 

[tvc184]

46 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

I presume they have to obey the posted speed limit. 

The police are not bound by speeding if on patrol, with patrol not being defined. Other emergency vehicles can be restricted in speed except the fire department en route to but not returning from an emergency.

Sec. 545.365. SPEED LIMIT EXCEPTION FOR EMERGENCIES; MUNICIPAL REGULATION. (a) The regulation of the speed of a vehicle under this subchapter does not apply to:

(1) an authorized emergency vehicle responding to a call;

(2) a police patrol; or

(3) a physician or ambulance responding to an emergency call.

(b) A municipality by ordinance may regulate the speed of:

(1) an ambulance;

(2) an emergency medical services vehicle; or

(3) an authorized vehicle operated by a blood or tissue bank.

Notice also that a city by ordinance can regulate the speed of EMS/ambulance and blood and tissue (transplants) emergency vehicles but not fire going to an emergency or police while on patrol at any time.

 That doesn’t stop a police or fire department from having internal policy however and it doesn’t exempt the police from other more serious violations. For example if an officer is going over the speed limit while en route to a routine (not emergency) call for service, it is by law not “speeding”. If the officer recklessly runs a stop sign and kills someone, he can be charged. 

[tvc184]

You are lawfully stopped/detained by a police officer while walking (the main point is not driving).

He asks you to identify yourself and you just look at him. You either say no or simply refuse to answer. He demands that you identify yourself but you continue to refuse.

(without google  )

Under the Texas law of Failure to Identify, if lawfully detained (example: in the alley behind a closed  business at 2:00am where a burglar alarm just went off), when do you have to identify yourself?

Or to make it easier, an officer lawfully stops you while you were walking down the sidewalk and demands your name but you refuse. What legal recourse does the officer have?

[LumRaiderFan]

16 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

You are lawfully stopped/detained by a police officer while walking (the main point is not driving).

He asks you to identify yourself and you just look at him. You either say no or simply refuse to answer. He demands that you identify yourself but you continue to refuse.

(without google  )

Under the Texas law of Failure to Identify, if lawfully detained (example: in the alley behind a closed  business at 2:00am where a burglar alarm just went off), when do you have to identify yourself?

Or to make it easier, an officer lawfully stops you while you were walking down the sidewalk and demands your name but you refuse. What legal recourse does the officer have?

I'll say you can be arrested for not cooperating with law enforcement.  You may have done nothing wrong but the officer may be looking for someone that committed a crime that matches your description.

Doesn't seem the system would work very well if you could just ignore law enforcement at will.

[thetragichippy]

On 3/25/2023 at 12:34 PM, tvc184 said:

In the same line of questions….

Fire

Police

EMS

 When  not on any emergency calls (going back to the station, heading to eat lunch/donuts, etc ), do they have a speed limit? 

A couple things - I thought in PA at least ambulances could only go 10 mph over posted speed limit (not that we ever paid attention)

Also, I remember there not being a "code 2" in Texas - meaning if you had lights you must have siren......was that true?

[rupert3]

I would say it is a lawful request on the officer's part.  To not do so seems like almost an admission of some problem,

[SmashMouth]

26 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

I would say it is a lawful request on the officer's part.  To not do so seems like almost an admission of some problem,

I think I know the answer to this, so I will not answer, but I do know it varies from state to state. When answering this question, remember due process, but don't let it throw you off.

[WOSdrummer99]

Somewhere I've heard the right to remind silent.

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

I'll say you can be arrested for not cooperating with law enforcement.  You may have done nothing wrong but the officer may be looking for someone that committed a crime that matches your description.

Doesn't seem the system would work very well if you could just ignore law enforcement at will.

Here is the short version.

1. If not under arrest, you don’t have to give any information including a name. 

2. If you do give a name, DOB or address while not under arrest, only if false is it a crime.

3. If under arrest and only if under arrest are you required to give those three pieces of information.

If you want the long version of why…….

 

If an officer in Texas requests your name while you are being detained and you refuse to give it, you cannot be arrested for refusal to give your name or even saying anything. A couple of points however.

If it is a detention only (a seizure under the Fourth Amendment) based on reasonable suspicion and not probable cause, the a person is not required to speak including the giving of a name, address or date of birth/DOB. If the person is under arrest then it is required to give name, address and DOB. Refusing at that point is an additional but misdemeanor crime (fine only). There is no law in Texas under the Failure to Identify law that requires a person to produce a physical ID. It is only required that the person gives the information to the officer.

I have mentioned this before in other comments but there is a big difference legally between reasonable suspicion and probable cause. RS is enough information that would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime “may have been “ committed and/or if the person detained “may have been” involved. PC is enough information that would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime “has been” or is about to be committed and the person “was involved”.

They are very close but the amount of information known to the officer is important. In the alarm example I gave, an alarm goes off at closed business early in the morning and a person is seen walking out of the alley from behind the business. The question becomes, would a reasonable person believe the person coming out from behind the business may have been involved in a crime since a burglar alarm went off?  I think the answer is yes, making a detention lawful…. if a judge agrees. At that point the officer doesn’t even know (1) if there has been a crime (could be a false alarm) and (2) even if there had been, was this person be involved. So the officer can likely lawfully detain the person to check out the situation. That person in such a situation is not required to say anything including a name. The person is required to stop but that is all. A couple of other officers checked by and found that the burglar alarm appeared to be false. At that point, person detained must be immediately released. The officer has negated the lawful reason for the detention. Another easy example would be if a crime has been committed (robbery for example) and a description was put out on the police radio of a suspect. An officer in the area spots a person that fits the description and detains him. That would likely be seen as lawful under reasonable suspicion in my opinion. Being in the vicinity of a crime and fitting a description of the suspect will generally be held as a lawful detention. A description alone is not enough evidence to believe that person was involved so the description alone is likely only RS.

Under probable cause, there would be enough information to believe that there had been a crime and that the person detained had committed that crime. The easiest example is a vehicle being driven on the road and the driver turns while not giving a signal. A turn signal is required so the officer has witnessed a crime. Nothing more is required lawfully to immediately arrest the person under PC. Another more involved example would be an officer on patrol at 2:00am and hears glass break at a nearby business. The officer drives to the business and arrived within a few seconds. The officer sees a man standing there with a hammer in his hand and broken glass at his feet. Would a reasonable person believe that the man just broke the glass? I would say yes and that is probable cause to arrest, not merely reasonable suspicion.

Why is any of that important while discussing Failure to ID?

As I mentioned earlier, only if a person is under arrest, is he required to give his name. So a cop detains a guy as being reasonably suspicious. The guy refuses to give his name and even laughs at the officer telling him, “I know the law and I don’t have to tell you”. That would be correct. But……. what if when the officer stopped the guy, he was walking in the roadway and there was a sidewalk. That is a crime. So the officer says, “You’re right, you only have to give me your name if you were under arrest. So… you are now under arrest for walking in the roadway where there is a sidewalk. Now, what is your name?”. 

If the police have nothing on you but reasonable suspicion, you can keep your mouth shut and not cooperate at all. If the officer has probable cause though……

Also note, while a person doesn’t have to identify himself unless under arrest, lying about a name, address or date of birth is a more serious crime. Even if you have never committed a crime and the  police ask you to identify yourself as the witness in a crime and you lie about your name or your address or your date of birth… it carries up to 6 months in jail.

If you aren’t going to tell the truth, keep your mouth shut. 

Sec. 38.02. FAILURE TO IDENTIFY.  
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.

(b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has:  
(1) lawfully arrested the person;   
(2) lawfully detained the person; or   
(3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.

Notice that in (a) refusing to give the information it is only if under arrest. In (b) as a witness or lawfully detained or under arrest, it is a crime if you give a “fictitious” name, address or DOB.

  

[tvc184]

14 minutes ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

Somewhere I've heard the right to remind silent.

The right to remain silent in the Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply to your name, address or date of birth. 

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

I think I know the answer to this, so I will not answer, but I do know it varies from state to state. When answering this question, remember due process, but don't let it throw you off.

Absolutely.

In Texas under the Failure to Identify law, if only “detained” you don’t have to give any information. That is only required if under arrest. 

In some states if lawfully detained, a person is required to identify himself only with any other information protected under the Fifth Amendment.

Meaning the Tenth Amendment looms large. Each state can enact its own laws as long as the law or right is not prohibited by the Constitution.  

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

A couple things - I thought in PA at least ambulances could only go 10 mph over posted speed limit (not that we ever paid attention)

Also, I remember there not being a "code 2" in Texas - meaning if you had lights you must have siren......was that true?

Correct, a city can restrict the speed of EMS and blood banks.

 A city by ordinance cannot restrict the police or fire when responding to an emergency. They can restrict speed by policy though. The difference is that speeding can’t result in a citation by city ordinance. A person can be disciplined for violating policy… just can’t be given a ticket.

A private EMS driver can be arrested for breaking a city ordinance speed limit. 

[thetragichippy]

27 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

A private EMS driver can be arrested for breaking a city ordinance speed limit

Ever heard of that happening? I remember police being pretty understanding at least when I was working. Looking back, I took some huge chances going through Crystal Beach headed to John Sealy. I remember getting one complaint from a highway patrol, called my boss. 

[tvc184]

27 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

Ever heard of that happening? I remember police being pretty understanding at least when I was working. Looking back, I took some huge chances going through Crystal Beach headed to John Sealy. I remember getting one complaint from a highway patrol, called my boss. 

 Professional courtesy.

Not personally but seen it on YouTube. Most issues are between the police and firefighters.

I was going to put an EMS driver in jail over time but I screwed up and called my sergeant to tell him my intentions because I was sure it would generate a complaint.

EMS heading south on Memorial Blvd in PA blew the red light at Gulfway Dr. As you know, a 6 lane highway crossing a 4 lane highway…. and there was traffic. Like moderate and leaning toward heavy traffic about 8pm.

He bottomed out hitting the hump on Gulfway Dr., probably 80-85 mph. The emergency call on Proctor St?

A sprained ankle.

I did not interfere with his call or the trip to the hospital. That is when I called my sergeant and let him know my intentions. Instead I his an arrest my sergeant wanted me to discuss it with him and he would call the EMS supervisor. I had a rather terse discussion with the driver about an arrest for Reckless Driving, carrying up to 30 days in the hoosegow.

Speeding? I don’t care. If this guy had been two seconds earlier or later, he might have been going to prison for manslaughter. 

[thetragichippy]

6 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

 Professional courtesy.

Not personally but seen it on YouTube. Most issues are between the police and firefighters.

I was going to put an EMS driver in jail over time but I screwed up and called my sergeant to tell him my intentions because I was sure it would generate a complaint.

EMS heading south on Memorial Blvd in PA blew the red light at Gulfway Dr. As you know, a 6 lane highway crossing a 4 lane highway…. and there was traffic. Like moderate and leaning toward heavy traffic about 8pm.

He bottomed out hitting the hump on Gulfway Dr., probably 80-85 mph. The emergency call on Proctor St?

A sprained ankle.

I did not interfere with his call or the trip to the hospital. That is when I called my sergeant and let him know my intentions. Instead I his an arrest my sergeant wanted me to discuss it with him and he would call the EMS supervisor. I had a rather terse discussion with the driver about an arrest for Reckless Driving, carrying up to 30 days in the hoosegow.

Speeding? I don’t care. If this guy had been two seconds earlier or later, he might have been going to prison for manslaughter. 

I never had an accident or damaged a vehicle (I as pretty hard on brakes).....but I can see you upset over that....