Howdy A ECNALG, you and MudCamperdid a wonderful job however, please remove the Hiibel v. Sixth because it isn't applicable to our State and it is sent misinformation to everyone, especially both lazy DAs & LEOs did missing the othercases facts.[/b]COURT CASES:[/b]
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial DIistrict Court of Nevada, Humbolt County, et al., 542 U.S. 177 (2004)
Reasonable Suspicion; Stop and Identify statutes; Terry search; 4[suP]th[/suP] Amendment
I'm aware of that and thanks for posted to narrow that down and I agreed as above but like I wrote before, lazy DAs and LEOs missed that parts isn't in their memos nor or explanation of why in Hiibel v. Sixth case? Are they bothered to read it all and so is the UOC? Mostly like to read in summary just like you did it as above posted. You already got Terry v. Ohio is good enough without the Hiibel. Please just add (not applicable in CA) to getting the DA and LEO attention and let's them figure it out why and what if they missed your posted from the thousands of threads here? Also add the link I posted as above before or used from the MudCamper's link: Kolender V. Lawson ondisregarded ofHiibel v. Sixth case.Thus, the citation of Hiibel is an important educational tool for those who practice, or intend to practice, UOC.
Hope, it is a fee time from them.