Educating Law Enforcement on carry laws

[VikingWarlord]

This part is not correct.

That's what I was led to understand. If asked, you are required to present. When you do, the subject is to be dropped.

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

If you're going to make up a handout citing ICs, cite the IC, then in large italics, perhaps of a different color, "This means: both OC and CC are legal", for example. Make sure you're using current IC and have it vetted by a lawyer, lest you be accused of trying to mislead. Maybe preface the whole thing with a paragraph stating the document is for informational/educational purposes.

 

[Salvation]

For what ever reason my PDF program wont let me save the document. But here is what I have so far.

Reference guide for encounters with responsible, licensed gun owners.

​

This document is intended as an aid to Law Enforcement personnel as a reference guide for encountering licensed gun owners. This has been compiled to assist Officers in the ever changing environment and frequent Indiana Code changes we ask them to execute their duties in.
This guide has been compiled through research of the Indiana code by a non-attorney. While it is considered accurate and up to date as of 7/25/2012 it is strongly recommended that each department or individual officer verify its accuracy. Again this is for reference and while the appropriate Indiana codes will be cited they are often long and would make a quick reference guide very lengthy.

License to carry a handgun:​

Indiana issues a license to carry a handgun to qualified individuals, often referred to as a LTCH. Unlike other states an Indiana permit is required for Concealed Carry (CC) AND Open Carry (OC). Indiana code does not dictate how a licensed permit holder may or may not carry their handgun as it pertains to CC or OC carry.
Some points to note:
In Melvin Washington vs. State of Indiana. It states that once a LTCH is produced all inquiries into the handgun must stop.
Requirements for a handgun license are covered by IC 35-47-2-3
[FONT=&quot]Indiana State police FAQ concerning Open carry can be found at the top of page 9 of the following document. http://www.in.gov/isp/files/2010_Firearms_licensing_FAQs(1).pdf[/FONT]

 

[Vince49]

Lower your aim (or your standards) ?

You might be thinking Malone as well. MALONE v. STATE, No.

And I mistyped when I said Johnson. I, myself, was thinking Richardson. That's the one with the "large bulge" in the pants.

Ya know, when you shoot you just never know when you might hit way above their heads!

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

I carry a copy of IC 38-44-3-12 as well when I have a mobile scanner on me, to show I'm excepted.

 

[Salvation]

I may be reading the abridged version of Richardson v. Indiana but what I got was they cannot conduct a search of a bulge if the initial traffic stop was for a seatbelt violation.

Kevin

 

[stephen87]

Yes, that was the case. It states that a bulge may not be reasonable cause to search a subject.

 

[CathyInBlue]

"Is that an illegally carried handgun in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?"

 

[Hammerhead]

I'm seeing some real misunderstanding of the court cases here. I'd recommend a search for State V. Richardson on INGO (or search through either Titanium_Frost's or my posts on the subject for more) but let me clarify stuff right now.

State v. Richardson states that once a valid (verified) LTCH is presented, all further inquiry into firearms must cease. Mr. Richardson responded to the officer's question about the bulge by stating that yes it was a firearm and that he was licensed properly. The officer did not properly verify the validity of the LTCH even after repeated attempts to do so. She then proceeded to search his vehicle without RAS and found his stash of cocaine. The search, the cocaine, and the firearm charges were all tossed by the INSC because of the valid LTCH. The court concluded that the officer overstepped her bounds because the initial stop was ONLY due to a seat belt violation, and that she had violated the IN seat belt law. They also concluded that EVEN IF she hadn't violated the IN seat belt law, the valid LTCH was enough of an answer to the firearm question that she had no PC or RAS to go further.

This does not mean that the case applies only to seat belt stops, as they clearly stated that even in interactions between LEOs and the public where the seat belt law isn't applicable, a valid (verified) LTCH is enough to end questioning into firearms.

Washington v. State - The INSC concluded that the search of Mr. Washington's car on the basis that he admitted to having a legally carried firearm (this was before Richardson, and was referenced in Richardson) once the police officers removed him from his vehicle, handcuffed him, and sat him on a curb, there was no danger and thus no PC, RAS, or authority to enter the vehicle to secure the handgun, thus finding Mr. Washington's contraband. The search and contraband was deemed "fruit of the poison tree" and tossed. This decision on "danger" or "officer safety" (as was likely the justification) went against IN code 35-47-14-3 because the danger had been mitigated by removing the suspect from the object and handcuffing him.

Terry v. Ohio - This also states that you must be armed and dangerous AND are being suspected of having committed, committing, or will be committing a crime in order to be stopped and patted down.

Indiana is not a must inform state. You do not have to tell a LEO anything about your legally carried firearm. If you are seen carrying (OC or your CC shows) and a LEO asks you for your LTCH, you will be required to prove that you are properly licensed. The IN code was changed as of July 1, 2011 and does not now state that you must carry your LTCH on you, only that you must be properly licensed. You do not have to present ID, nor ID yourself under IC 34-28-5-3.5 unless you have committed an ordinance violation or infraction. Carrying a firearm without a license is a misdemeanor (or a felony under certain circumstances). Presenting your LTCH is a valid defense of the charge via IC 35-47-2-24, or an end to questioning at that very moment under Richardson.