AL: When detainee doesn’t properly ID himself, the officer can demand proof of ID

The N.D. Ala. certified this question: “Under [Ala. Code 1975,] § 15-5-30, when a law enforcement officer asks a person for his name, address, and explanation of his actions, and the person gives an incomplete or unsatisfactory oral response, does the statute prohibit the officer from demanding or requesting physical identification?” No. Jennings v. Smith, 2026 Ala. LEXIS 28 (Mar. 13, 2026):

In summary, Alabama law is clear — once an officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that a suspect is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a felony or other public offense, § 15-5-30 empowers the officer to demand that the suspect disclose his or her name and address in a format that would allow the officer to affirmatively identify the suspect. As indicated above, establishing a suspect’s correct identity furthers an important governmental function by allowing an officer to confirm whether a suspect is violating the law or by eliminating the suspect from suspicion. If the officer’s demand for a name and address is not heeded, then the officer is faced with choices. The officer can either arrest the suspect for intentionally preventing the officer from performing a governmental function in violation of § 13A-10-2(a)(2) or delay the arrest and supplement the demand by asking for more conclusive positive identification. Either way, the suspect bears the burden to completely identify himself or herself during a valid Terry stop; thus, failing to provide sufficient identifying information when demanded to do so violates Alabama law.

Watering flowers while black: AP: In Black pastor’s arrest, Alabama Supreme Court rules police can demand to see identification:

Ruling in the case of a Black pastor who was arrested while watering his neighbor’s flowers, the Alabama Supreme Court said police can demand to see identification during a stop if they are dissatisfied with a person’s verbal answers.

Justices issued the 6-3 decision last week after a federal judge presiding over a lawsuit about Michael Jennings’ 2022 arrest asked the court to clarify whether officers can demand to see a person’s identification under the state’s “stop-and-identify” law. The minister was arrested when he declined to show Childersburg police identification.

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.