"False informing" of a firearm? A crime?

[rambone]

I was reading a crime blurb and saw that someone was arrested for "false informing" during a traffic stop. The writing makes it sound like it was in relation to possessing firearms.

Law and Order: Traffic stop in Gary nets drugs, weapons - Post-Tribune

Anderson was being held facing charges of being a felon in possession of a firearm, possession of a stolen firearm, operating without a valid license, carrying a gun without a license and false informing.
​

​

I have been under the impression that there was no Indiana law requiring you to inform a police officer of your being armed. Can someone cite the Indiana code or clarify what this charge entails?

Muchas gracias.

 

[Mikeshep1462]

I get the feeling they mean "false Informing" as they asked him his name, and he gave a fake or something similar, which was just not worded very well in the article.

 

[Denny347]

It was a traffic stop. 100% that he gave false information which would be "Refusal to Identify" but some call it "false informing".

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It was a traffic stop. 100% that he gave false information which would be "Refusal to Identify" but some call it "false informing".

No, it's not Refusal to Identify; it is False Informing.

"Oh, man, I'm not Reggie, I'm his cousin, Terrance."

Wait, why am I telling you?

False Informing=>Ind. Code § 35-44-2-2 : Indiana Code - Section 35-44-2-2: False reporting or informing

Nothing to do with the gun, EVERYTHING to do with who he is. He was warranted on warrants, he was driving was while suspended, his baby mama turned him in for child support, pick one or all of the above.

 

[cobber]

Maybe he told them the taillight wasn't broken.

 

[rambone]

Thanks guys. Now if I can just convince one of my know-it-all acquaintances that the firearm informing law does not exist.

 

[ATM]

Thanks guys. Now if I can just convince one of my know-it-all acquaintances that the firearm informing law does not exist.

I guess it will exist when the acquaintance can find it in the code. Until then, we all know that it doesn't.

 

[jrogers]

It is not mandatory to voluntarily inform, but that doesn' t mean it's legal to lie to the cops:

IC 35-44-2-2[/B]]
False reporting or informing
Sec. 2. (a) As used in this section, "consumer product"
has the meaning set forth in IC 35-45-8-1.
(b) As used in this section,
"misconduct" means a violation of a departmental rule or procedure of a law
enforcement agency.
(c) A person who reports, by telephone, telegraph,
mail, or other written or oral communication, that:
(1) the person or
another person has placed or intends to place an explosive, a destructive
device, or other destructive substance in a building or transportation
facility;
(2) there has been or there will be tampering with a
consumer product introduced into commerce; or
(3) there has been or
will be placed or introduced a weapon of mass destruction in a building or a
place of assembly;
knowing the report to be false commits false reporting, a
Class D felony.
(d) A person who:
(1) gives a false report of
the commission of a crime or gives false information in the official
investigation of the commission of a crime, knowing the report or information to
be false;
(2) gives a false alarm of fire to the fire department of a
governmental entity, knowing the alarm to be false;
(3) makes a false
request for ambulance service to an ambulance service provider, knowing the
request to be false;
(4) gives a false report concerning a missing child (as defined in
IC 10-13-5-4) or missing endangered adult (as defined in IC 12-7-2-131.3) or
gives false information in the official investigation of a missing child or
missing endangered adult knowing the report or information to be false;
or
(5) makes a complaint against a law enforcement officer to the
state or municipality (as defined in IC 8-1-13-3) that employs the
officer:
(A) alleging the officer engaged in misconduct while
performing the officer's duties; and
(B) knowing the complaint to
be false;
commits false informing, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the
offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it substantially hinders any law enforcement
process or if it results in harm to an innocent person.

 

[Denny347]

No, it's not Refusal to Identify; it is False Informing.

"Oh, man, I'm not Reggie, I'm his cousin, Terrance."

Wait, why am I telling you?


False Informing=>Ind. Code § 35-44-2-2 : Indiana Code - Section 35-44-2-2: False reporting or informing

Nothing to do with the gun, EVERYTHING to do with who he is. He was warranted on warrants, he was driving was while suspended, his baby mama turned him in for child support, pick one or all of the above.

oh, well, we use refusal to identify almost exclusively w/o issue in those cases but I see that it fits better in false informing...something we never use for some reason.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

oh, well, we use refusal to identify almost exclusively w/o issue in those cases but I see that it fits better in false informing...something we never use for some reason.

Refusal to identify only applies to violations of ordinances or infractions, false informing applies to everything else.

 

[remauto1187]

Whats this world coming to when two coppers on here have 2 different opinions on the law? No wonder "its a jungle out there"?

 

[Fargo]

oh, well, we use refusal to identify almost exclusively w/o issue in those cases but I see that it fits better in false informing...something we never use for some reason.

The biggest reason False Informing doesn't normally apply to traffic stops is because it usually has to be "in the official investigation of the commission of a crime". Since most traffic stops are for non-criminal offenses, lying during them doesn't trigger false informing UNLESS THE OFFICER HAS REASONABLE SUSPICION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

As Denny points out, the refusal to ID statute applies to people stopped for ordinance/infraction violations so lying about your identity on a traffic stop usually fits that statute. Keep in mind though, that it only applies to the person stopped for the violation, not his/her passengers.

Best,


Joe

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Whats this world coming to when two coppers on here have 2 different opinions on the law? No wonder "its a jungle out there"?

They are two different statutes used for two different applications of the law. Most beat cops don't even use the false informing statute. I'm sure you'll find a way to twist my reply to meet your agenda though.

 

[Denny347]

Refusal to identify only applies to violations of ordinances or infractions, false informing applies to everything else.

I know, that is where we usually run into this. It is hard for me to recall an incident that a traffic stop wasn't involved.

 

[Denny347]

Whats this world coming to when two coppers on here have 2 different opinions on the law? No wonder "its a jungle out there"?

Why do I even bother anymore?

 

[daddymikey1975]

It is not mandatory to voluntarily inform, but that doesn' t mean it's legal to lie to the cops:

Based on your quote of the IC, lieing (sp ?) to a cop when asked "are there any drugs or weapons in the car?" doesn't qualify as an official investigation of the commission of a crime since he's trying to ascertain "is there a weapon, or drugs in the car".. at which point, you're not suspected of committing a crime.

Or did I read it wrong ? lol

 

[Yup!]

[video=youtube_share;swemLV06TOs]http://youtu.be/swemLV06TOs[/video]

So when I get pulled over and the cops asks, "do you know why I pulled you over?" Am I supposed to go all Jim Carey on him?

 

[daddymikey1975]

[video=youtube_share;swemLV06TOs]http://youtu.be/swemLV06TOs[/video]

So when I get pulled over and the cops asks, "do you know why I pulled you over?" Am I supposed to go all Jim Carey on him?

Love this movie.

If the cop pulls you over and says "do you know how fast you were travelling ?".. the answer could be "why are you asking me, you're the one with the radar"

 

[CathyInBlue]

No, it's not Refusal to Identify; it is False Informing.

"Oh, man, I'm not Reggie, I'm his cousin, Terrance."

Wait, why am I telling you?

False Informing=>Ind. Code § 35-44-2-2 : Indiana Code - Section 35-44-2-2: False reporting or informing

Nothing to do with the gun, EVERYTHING to do with who he is. He was warranted on warrants, he was driving was while suspended, his baby mama turned him in for child support, pick one or all of the above.

Indiana Code TITLE 35, Article 44 Table of Contents

REPEALED

Care to take another stab at it, Sparky?

Okay. that wasn't really fair. The GA does this a lot. The basicly same law is still on the books, but reorganized under 44.1, instead of 44.

IC 35-44.1-2-3 Version b
False reporting
Note: This version of section amended by P.L.158-2013, SEC.503, effective 7-1-2014.
See also preceding version of this section amended by P.L.292-2013, SEC.11.
Sec.3. (a) As used in this section,"consumer product" has the meaning set forth in IC 35-45-8-1.
(b) As used in this section, "misconduct" means a violation of a departmental rule or procedure of a law enforcement agency.
(c) A person who reports, by telephone, telegraph, mail, or other written or oral communication, that:
(1) the person or another person has placed or intends to place an explosive, a destructive device, or other destructive substance in a building or transportation facility;
(2)there has been or there will be tampering with a consumer product introduced into commerce; or
(3)there has been or will be placed or introduced a weapon of mass destruction ina building or a place of assembly;
knowing the report to be false, commits false reporting, a Level 6 felony.
(d) A person who:
(1) gives a false report of the commission of a crime or gives false information in the official investigation of the commission of a crime, knowing the report or information to be false;
(2) gives a false alarm of fire to the fire department of a governmental entity, knowing the alarm to be false;
(3) makes a false request for ambulance service to an ambulance service provider, knowing the request to be false;
(4) gives a false report concerning a missing child (as defined in IC 10-13-5-4) or missing endangered adult (as defined in IC 12-7-2-131.3) or gives false information in the official investigation of a missing child or missing endangered adultknowing thereport or information to be false;
(5) makesacomplaintagainstalawenforcementofficertothestateormunicipality(asdefinedinIC8-1-13-3(b))thatemploystheofficer:
(A) allegingtheofficerengagedinmisconductwhileperforming the officer's duties;and
(B) knowing the complaint to be false; or
(6) makes a false report of a missing person, knowing the report or information is false;
commits false informing, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it substantially hinders any law enforcement process or if it results in harm to another person.
As added by P.L.126-2012, SEC.54. Amended by P.L.158-2013,SEC.503.

IC 35-44.1-2-4
False identity statement
Sec. 4. (a) A person who:
(1) with intent to mislead public servants;
(2) in a five(5) year period; and
(3) in one(1) or more official proceedings or investigations;
has knowingly made at least two(2) material statements concerning the person's identity that are inconsistent to the degree that one(1) of them is necessarily false commits false identity statement, a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that the material statements that are the basis of a prosecution under subsection (a) concerning the person's identity are accurate or were accurate in the past.
(c) In a prosecution under subsection (a):
(1) the indictment or information need not specify which statement is actually false; and
(2) the falsity of a statement may be established sufficiently for conviction by proof that the defendant made irreconcilably contradictory statements concerning the person's identity.
As added by P.L.126-2012, SEC.54.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Care to take another stab at it, Sparky?

Stab at what? They just moved False informing to 44.1. False Informing is still a misdemeanor even though they moved it.

Edit: Oh, I see, yeah, I'm old. You say False Informing and I will upchuck 35-44-2-2 without fail. They moved it to Article 44.1 in '12. Back then all this was orchard . . . *hikes up pants* and I wore an onion on my belt.