On December 20, 2002, the Nevada Supreme Court decided the case ofHiibel v. 6th Judicial District Court. The Court held that as a matter of first impression, a Nevada statute allowing an officer, during an investigatory stop, to detain a person to ascertain his identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding his presence abroad, did not violate the Fourth Amendment right to privacy.

The case was then appealed and upheld by the United States Supreme Court.

You may read both cases:

Westlaw. 59 P.3d 1201 Page 1 18 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201 (Cite as: 118 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201) ability to wander freely and anonymously, if one so chooses, without being compelled to divulge in- Supreme Court of Nevada. formation to the government about who one is or Larry D. HIIBEL, Petitioner, what one is doing. (Per Young, C.J., with two The SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of The Justice concurring and one Justice concurring in result.) U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. State of Nevada, in and for the COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT, and the Honorable Richard A. Wag- [21 Searches and Seizures 349 @-25.1 ner, District Judge, Respondents, and 349 Searches and Seizures The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest. 3491 In General 349k25 Persons, Places and Things Protected No. 38876 349k25.1 k. In general. Most Cited Cases Dec. 20, 2002. The right to be let alone, or to simply live in Rehearing Denied April 25, 2003. privacy, is a right protected by the Fourth Amend- ment. (Per Young, C.J., with two Justice concurring Defendant was convicted, before a justice of and one Justice concurring in result.) U.S.C.A. he peace, of resisting a public officer. Defendant Const.Amend. 4. appealed. The Sixth Judicial District Court, Hum boldt County, Richard A. affirmed. De- 131 Searches and Seizures 349 23 fendant petitioned for writ of certiorari. The Su- preme Court, Young, C.J., held that, as a matter of $49 Searches and Seizures first impression, a Nevada statute allowing an of- 3491 In General ficer, during an investigatory stop, to detain a per- 349k23 k. Fourth Amendment and reason- son to ascertain his identity and the suspicious cir ableness in general. Most Cited Cases cumstances surrounding his presence abroad, did The Fourth Amendment right to privacy is not not violate the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. absolute, and like all freedoms, it includes both lim itations and responsibilities, with one such limita- Petition denied. tion being reasonableness, because the Fourth Amendment protects only against unreasonable in- Maupin, J., filed an opinion concurring in the vasions of privacy. (Per Young, C.J., with two esult. Justice concurring and one Justice concurring in Agosti, J., filed a dissenting opinion with result.) U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. which Shearing and Rose, JJ., agreed. [41 Searches and Seizures 349 26 West Headnotes 349 Searches and Seizures [1] Constitutional Law 92 1280 3491 In General 349k25 Persons, Places and Things Protected 92 Constitutional Law 349k26 k. Expectation of privacy. Most 92XII Freedom of Travel and Movement Cited Cases 92k 1280 k. In general. Most Cited Cases Traditionally, in resolving issues implicating Formerly 92k83(1)) the Fourth Amendment right to privacy, the touch Fundamental to a democratic society is the stone question is whether the invasion of privacy is reasonable. (Per Young, C.J., with two Justice con- 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. 59 P.3d 1201 Page 2 1 18 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201 (Cite as: 118 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201) curring and one Justice concurring in result.) to arbitrary invasions solely at the unfettered dis- J.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4. cretion of officers in the field. (Per Young, C.J., with two Justice concurring and one Justice concur- (5] Searches and Seizures 349 26 ring in result.) U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. $49 Searches and Seizures 181 Arrest 35 @-60.2(20) 3491 In General 349k25 Persons, Places and Things Protected 35 Arrest 349k26 k. Expectation of privacy. Most 3511 On Criminal Charges Cited Cases 35k60.2 Investigatory Stop or Stop and Frisk The reasonableness of an intrusion on the 35k60.2(20) k. Duration of detention and Fourth Amendment right to privacy is determined extent or conduct of investigation or frisk. Most by balancing the public interest and the individual's Cited Cases right to personal security free from arbitrary inter (Formerly 35k63.5(9)) ference by law officers. (Per Young, C.J., with two Any intrusion of the Fourth Amendment right Justice concurring and one Justice concurring in o privacy was reasonable, as to statute allowing an result.) U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4. officer, during an investigatory stop, to detain a person to ascertain his identity and suspicious cir- [61 Searches and Seizures 349 26 cumstances surrounding his presence; knowing the 349 Searches and Seizures identity of a suspect allowed officers to more accur 3491 In General ately evaluate and predict potential dangers that 349k25 Persons, Places and Things Protected may arise during investigative stop, the requirement 349k26 k. Expectation of privacy. Most to produce identification enabled an officer to de- Cited Cases termine whether the suspect was breaking certain Considerations regarding the reasonableness of laws, the nation was at war against enemies operat- an intrusion on the Fourth Amendment right to pri- ing with concealed identities, and the intrusion on vacy involve the weighing of the gravity of the pub- privacy was minimal. (Per Young, C.J., with two lic concerns served by the seizure, the degree to Justices concurring and one Justice concurring in which the seizure advances the public interest, and result.) U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4; West's NRSA the severity of the interference with individual 171.123, subd. 3. liberty. (Per Young, C.J., with two Justice concur *#1202 *868 Steven G. McGuire, State Public De- ring and one Justice concurring in result.) U.S.C.A. fender, and James P. Logan, Chief Deputy Public Const.Amend. 4. Defender, Carson City, for Petitioner. [71 Searches and Seizures 349 26 *869 Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General, Car- 49 Searches and Seizures son City; David G. Allison, District Attorney, and 3491 In General Conrad Hafen, Chief Deputy District Attorney, 349k25 Persons, Places and Things Protected Humboldt County, for Real Party in Interest. 349k26 k. Expectation of privacy. Most Cited Cases Before the Court En Banc. A primary concern, when determining the reas- onableness of an intrusion on the Fourth Amend- ment right to privacy, is to assure that an individu- #870 OPINION al's reasonable expectation of privacy is not subject YOUNG, C.J. The pertinent issue before us is whether NRS 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. 59 P.3d 1201 Page 3 118 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201 (Cite as: 118 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201) 171.123(3), which requires a person *#1203 Hiibel to identify himself, Hiibel refused. Instead, stopped under reasonable suspicion by a police of- Hiibel placed his hands behind his back and chal- ficer to identify himself or herself, violates the lenged the officer to take him to jail. Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitu- tion. We conclude NRS 171.123(3) does not violate Hiibel said he would cooperate but was unwill- the Fourth Amendment because it strikes a balance ing to provide identification, because he did not be between constitutional protections of privacy and lieve he had done anything wrong. After eleven re the need to protect police officers and the public. quests for identification, to no avail, Dove arrested Therefore, Hiibel's petition for a writ of certiorari is Dove described the situation as follows: denied. [Djuring my conversation with Mr. Hiibel, there In pertinent part, NRS 171.123 provides: was a point where he became somewhat agressive [sic]. 1. Any peace officer may detain any person whom the officer encounters under circumstances *871 I felt based on me not being able to find which reasonably indicate that the person has out who he was, to identify him, I didn't know if committed, is committing or is about to commit a he was wanted or what is [sic] situation was, I crime [wasn't able to determine what was going on crimewise in the vehicle, based on that I felt he was intoxicated, and how he was becoming ag- gressive and moody, I went ahead and put him in 3. The officer may detain the person pursuant handcuffs so I could secure him for my safety, to this section only to ascertain his identity and and put him in my patrol vehicle. the suspicious circumstances surrounding his presence abroad. Any person so detained shall Hiibel was charged and found guilty of resist- identify himself, but may not be compelled to an- ing a public officer, in violation of NRS 199.280. swer any other inquiry of any peace officer. The justice of the peace in Humboldt County determined that "[Hiibel] was asked only for identi- 4. A person may not be detained longer than is fication and failure to provide identification ob reasonably necessary to effect the purposes of structed and delayed Dove as a public officer in at- his section, and in no event longer than 60 tempting to discharge his duty." minutes FN1. NRS 199.280 states In response to a call from police dispatch, Humboldt County Sheriff's Deputy Lee Dove drove A person who, in any case or under any o the scene where a concerned citizen had ob- circumstances not otherwise speciallyWestlaw. 124 S.Ct. 2451 Page 1 542 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451, 159 L.Ed.2d 292, 72 USLW 4509, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5378, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7363, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 406 (Cite as: 542 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451) 35k60.4 What Constitutes a Seizure or De- tention Supreme Court of the United States 35k60.4(1) k. In general. Most Cited Larry D. HIIBEL, Petitioner, Cases (Formerly 35k68(4)) SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF Interrogation relating to one's identity or re- NEVADA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, et al. quest for identification by police does not, by itself, No. 03-5554. constitute Fourth Amendment seizure. U.S.C.A. Argued March 22, 2004. Const. Amend. 4. Decided June 21, 2004. Rehearing Denied Aug. 23, 121 Arrest 35 @-60.2(10) 2004. See 542 U.S. 960, 125 S.Ct. 18. $5 Arrest Background: Defendant was convicted, before 3511 On Criminal Charges justice of the peace, of violating Nevada's "stop and 35k60.2 Investigatory Stop or Stop and Frisk dentify" statute. The Sixth Judicial District Court, 35k60.2(6) Grounds for Stop or Investiga- Humboldt County, Wagner, J., upheld conviction, tion and the Nevada Supreme Court, 118 Nev. 868, 59 P.3d 1201, Young, C.J., affirmed. Certiorari was 35k60.2(10) k. Reasonableness; reason r founded suspicion, etc. Most Cited Cases granted. (Formerly 35k63.5(4)) Holdings: The Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy, Arrest 35 60.2(20) held that: (1) arrest of Terry stop suspect for refusal to identi- 35 Arrest fy himself, in violation of Nevada law, did not viol- 3511 On Criminal Charges ate Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreas- 35k60.2 Investigatory Stop or Stop and Frisk onable searches and seizures, and 35k60.2(20) k. Duration of detention and (2) defendant's conviction for refusal to identify extent or conduct of investigation or frisk. Most himself did not violate his Fifth Amendment right Cited Cases against self-incriminatin (Formerly 35k63.5(9)) In order for Terry stop to be constitutionally Affirmed. reasonable, officer's action must be justified at its inception, and reasonably related in scope to cir- Justice Stevens dissented and filed opinion. cumstances which justified interference in first place; seizure cannot continue for excessive period of time or resemble traditional arrest. U.S.C.A. Justice Breyer dissented and filed opinion in Const. Amend. 4. which Justices Souter and Ginsburg joined. (31 Arrest 35 @~~60.2(20) West Headnotes 35 Arrest [1] Arrest 35 60.4(1) 3511 On Criminal Charges 35 Arrest 35k60.2 Investigatory Stop or Stop and Frisk 3511 On Criminal Charges 35k60.2(20) k. Duration of detention and extent or conduct of investigation or frisk. Most 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. 124 S.Ct. 2451 Page 2 542 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451, 159 L.Ed.2d 292, 72 USLW 4509, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5378, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7363, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. $ 406 (Cite as: 542 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451) Cited Cases extent or conduct of investigation or frisk. Most (Formerly 35k63.5(9)) Cited Cases Nevada's "stop and identify" statute, requiring Formerly 35k63.5(9)) suspect to disclose his name in course of Terry Officer's request for identification was reason- stop, does not violate Fourth Amendment prohibit ably related to circumstances justifying Terry stop, tion against unreasonable searches and seizures; re- and thus his arrest of suspect for failure to comply with Nevada's "stop and identify" law did not viol- purpose, rationale, and practical demands of Terry ate Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreas- stop, threat of criminal sanction helps ensure that onable searches and seizures; officer's request was request for identity does not become legal nullity, commonsense inquiry when investigating potential and statute does not alter nature of stop itself domestic dispute involving motorist, and not effort U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4; West's NRSA 171.123, to obtain arrest for failure to identify after Terry subd. 3. stop yielded insufficient evidence. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4; West's NRSA 171.123, subd. 3. 141 Arrest 35 ( 63.4(15) [6] Criminal Law 110 393(1) 35 Arrest 3511 On Criminal Charges 10 Criminal Law 35k63 Officers and Assistants, Arrest 1 10XVII Evidence Without Warrant 1 10XVII(I) Competency in General 35k63.4 Probable or Reasonable Cause 1 10k393 Compelling Self-Incriminatin 35k63.4(15) k. Appearance, acts, and 1 10k393(1) k. In general. Most Cited statements of persons arrested. Most Cited Cases Cases Fourth Amendment precludes officer from ar To qualify for Fifth Amendment privilege resting Terry stop suspect for failure to comply against self-incriminating communication must be with state "stop and identify" law if officer's re- testimonial, incriminating, and compelled. U.S.C.A. quest for identification is not reasonably related to Const.Amend. 5. circumstances justifying stop. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. 171 Criminal Law 110 393(1) [5] Arrest 35 C-63.4(15) 110 Criminal Law 1 10XVII Evidence 35 Arrest 1 10XVII(I) Competency in General 3511 On Criminal Charges 1 10k393 Compelling Self-Incriminatin 35k63 Officers and Assistants, Arrest 1 10k393(1) k. In general. Most Cited Without Warrant Cases 35k63.4 Probable or Reasonable Cause To be testimonial, within meaning of Fifth 35k63.4(15) k. Appearance, acts, and Amendment privilege against self-incriminating statements of persons arrested. Most Cited Cases accused's communication must itself, explicitly or implicitly, relate factual assertion or disclose in- Arrest 35 ~60.2(20) formation. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5. 5 Arrest 181 Criminal Law 110 393(1) 3511 On Criminal Charges 35k60.2 Investigatory Stop or Stop and Frisk 1 10 Criminal Law 35k60.2(20) k. Duration of detention and 1 10XVII Evidence 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. 124 S.Ct. 2451 Page 3 $42 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451, 159 L.Ed.2d 292, 72 USLW 4509, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5378, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7363, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 406 (Cite as: 542 U.S. 177, 124 S.Ct. 2451) 10XVII(I) Competency in General christou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 167-171, 92 1 10k393 Compelling Self-Incriminatin S.Ct. 839, 31 L.Ed.2d 110, this Court invalidated a 1 10k393(1) k. In general. Most Cited traditional vagrancy law for vagueness because of Cases its broad scope and imprecise terms. The Court re- Terry stop suspect's arrest and conviction for cognized similar constitutional limitations in Brown refusal to identify himself, in violation of Nevada's v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47, 52, 99 S.Ct. 2637, 61 "stop and identify" law, did not violate his Fifth L.Ed.2d 357, where it invalidated a conviction for Amendment right against self-incriminating absent violating a Texas stop and identify statute on showing that disclosure of his name presented any Fourth Amendment grounds, and in Kolender v. reasonable danger of incriminating suspect's belief Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 103 S.Ct. 1855, 75 L.Ed.2d that his name was none of officer's business was in- 903, where it invalidated on vagueness grounds sufficient. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5; West's NRSA 171.123, subd. 3. required a suspect to give an officer "credible and * *2452 *177 Syllabus FN* reliable" identification when asked to identify him- self, id., at 360, 103 S.Ct. 1855. This case begins FN* The syllabus constitutes no part of the where those cases left off. Here, the initial stop was opinion of the Court but has been prepared based on reasonable suspicion, satisfying the Fourth by the Reporter of Decisions for the con- Amendment requirements noted in Brown. Further, venience of the reader. See United States v. Hiibel has not alleged that the Nevada statute is un- Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. constitutionally vague, as in Kolender. This statute 321, 337, 26 S.Ct. 282, 50 L.Ed. 499. is narrower and more precise. In contrast to the "credible and reliable" identification requirement in Petitioner Hiibel was arrested and convicted in Kolender, the Nevada Supreme Court has inter- a Nevada court for refusing to identify himself to a preted the instant statute to require only that a sus- police officer during an investigative stop involving pect disclose his name. It apparently does not re- a reported assault. Nevada's "stop and identify" quire him to produce a driver's license or any other statute requires a person detained by an officer un- document. If he chooses either to state his name or der suspicious circumstances to identify himself communicate it to the officer by other means, the The state intermediate appellate court affirmed, re- statute is satisfied and no violation occurs. Pp. jecting Hiibel's argument that the state law's applica 2456-2457. ation to his case violated the Fourth and Fifth *#2453 Amendments. The Nevada Supreme Court *178 b) The officer's conduct did not violate affirmed. Hiibel's Fourth Amendment rights. Ordinarily, an investigating officer is free to ask a person for iden- Held: Petitioner's conviction does not violate tification without implicating the Amendment. INS