http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2002/Dec-21-Sat-2002/news/20327620.html
Las Vegas Review Journal Saturday, December 21, 2002 SUPREME COURT: Justices rule suspect must give police ID Dissenting judge fears erosion of civil liberties while others say officer's safety is paramount By ED VOGEL REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- In a 4-3 decision in which justices debated terrorism and its effect on American civil liberties, the state Supreme Court ruled Friday that a police officer can order a suspect to produce identification. The majority decided that Humboldt County Deputy Sheriff Lee Dove rightfully asked suspect Larry Hiibel to identify himself out of concern for his personal safety. Hiibel refused to identify himself during a May 2000 stop just outside of Winnemucca because he did not believe he did anything wrong. After Dove asked him 11 times to produce identification, Hiibel was arrested. The law requires people to identify themselves to police when ordered to do so. In a stinging dissenting opinion, Justice Deborah Agosti said the court majority "has allowed the first layer of our civil liberties to be whittled away." She contended that the "the right to wander freely and anonymously, if we so choose, is a fundamental right of privacy in a democratic society." Dove had been sent by dispatchers to a site where someone saw a man striking a girl inside a truck. When the officer arrived, he saw Hiibel standing outside a truck. He said he thought Hiibel was intoxicated and his daughter was sitting in his truck. Hiibel later was convicted in district court of resisting and obstructing a police officer in carrying out his duties. He appealed that verdict -- and a fine of $320 -- to the Supreme Court. In the majority decision, Justice Cliff Young wrote that the "right to be let alone -- to simply live in privacy" is sacred, but that it is not absolute. Young and Justices Myron Leavitt and Nancy Becker said the "intrusion on privacy" made by police seeking identification is "outweighed by the benefits to officers and community safety." "The most dangerous time for an officer may be during an investigative stop -- when a suspect is approached and questioned," Young wrote. He noted that 51 officers were killed in the line of duty in the United States in 2000, including 13 during traffic stops and six during investigations of suspicious persons. "Knowing the identify of a suspect allows officers to more accurately evaluate and predict potential dangers that may arise during an investigative stop," Young wrote in the majority decision concurred in by Chief Justice Bill Maupin. But Young went beyond the Nevada case when he cited how police authorities need all the help they can get in the war against terrorism. "More importantly, we are at war against enemies who operate with concealed identities, and the dangers we face as a nation are unparalleled," he stated. "Terrorism is changing the way we live and the way we act and the way we think." The justice then repeated a comment made last year by President Bush: "This is a different kind of war that requires a different type of approach and a different type of mentality." To be forced to reveal one's identity, according to Young, is not an invasion of privacy. He pointed out that people give their names to others every day "without much consideration" and part of "polite manners." But in the dissenting opinion written by Agosti and concurred in by Justices Bob Rose and Miriam Shearing, the court minority expressed concern about the loss of civil rights since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. "Now is precisely the time when our duty to vigilantly guard the rights enumerated in the Constitution becomes most important," Agosti wrote. "To ease our guard now, in the wake of fear and unknown perpetrators who may still seek to harm the United States and its people, would sound the call of retreat and begin the erosion of civil liberties." Agosti also maintained that the "true test of our national courage" is not defending ourselves against terrorism, but "our necessary and steadfast resolve to protect and safeguard the rights and principles upon which our nation was founded, our constitution and our personal liberties." While siding with the majority, Maupin said he thought the majority overreacted with its references to the dangers of the war on terrorism. He said the decision was simply over a police officer's need to protect himself against a man suspected of domestic violence and drunken driving. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
