In Ohio, specifically, must you have your license/ID card on you every time you operate a vehicle? I know I have been pulled over without it and they looked me up, but they may have just been giving me a pass or something. I can’t find it on Google, but I know that someone here probably can.
Brendon Small
I don’t know about Ohio, but New York requires you to have it whenever you are operating a vehicle on public roads. However, they can and will look you up if you don’t have it, and will almost certainly give you a ticket for not having it only if you give them a hard time. The vast majority of the time, they will let you go (with or without a ticket for the original reason they stopped you) with only a warning to have it with you next time you drive.
In Washington it’s a relatively small fine if you have one, but don’t have it with you when you’re driving. $49 or so. More worse if you don’t have a valid license, of course.
Probably varies by state, but this is very common. When stopped you can (and usually are) asked to show license and registration - has been the case in the 6 states where I’ve held a license (none of which is Ohio). Failure to produce these reliably leads to some degree of unpleasantness.
Look up ORC 4507.35 - Duty to display license or furnish satisfactory proof of license upon demand.
(editor’s note: it’s actually a very nice statute (and actually this issue) for a law professor wishing to discuss concepts such as legal presumptions, burdens of persuasion and proof, and the legal definition of “possession”, and constitutional issues regarding the obligation to identify yourself)
This issue is pertinent to me. I am licensed to drive, but my proof of such licensure is 1,000 miles away. I think I could talk my way out of a ticket by showing other government- issued picture ID that I have, giving my valid DL #, and being polite. I think I would have met my burden of proof. (and the chances of having to even do this are near zero) But the wife won’t let me drive to the convenience store.
I looked up my state statute, and there is a provision requiring me to have my license on me. But it’s under the statute concerning licenses of this state. I would argue to the judge that it doesn’t apply to my license which is from another state.
Upon which my fine would be doubled and court costs assessed.
keep reading the vehicle code. also, keep in mind that since your license is out of state, it’s going to be harder for the copper to confirm that you are indeed licensed to drive.
and then you may irk him enough that he pokes around your state residency, further causing you problems.
FWIW, New Hampshire says:
I think much of this has to do with the recreational nature of much of New Hampshire. Many years ago, it was explained to me as satisfying the rental merchants desire to hold a DL of a renter as security on their property. e.g. Ski rentals, etc.
I think it’s a good law, as it allows them to write the ticket, but for the ticket to be annulled if evidence of a valid license is presented in a reasonable time.
Yes, in Ohio, you must have your driver license with you at all times when driving. If you:
each is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable if convicted by up to six months in jail and a $1000 fine. That said, if you show your valid license when you come to court for arraignment in our muni court (and many others), and show proof of insurance (also required by Ohio law), that charge would then likely be dismissed.
can I get a cite? ORC 4507.35 seems to contradict your claim #1. (3-4 aren’t really apt to the OP).
Not how I read it, and not how it’s applied in my and every other court of which I’m aware:
*§4507.35. Duty to display license or furnish satisfactory proof of license upon demand
(A) The operator of a motor vehicle shall display the operator’s driver’s license, or furnish satisfactory proof that the operator has a driver’s license, upon demand of any peace officer or of any person damaged or injured in any collision in which the licensee may be involved. When a demand is properly made and the operator has the operator’s driver’s license on or about the operator’s person, the operator shall not refuse to display the license. A person’s failure to furnish satisfactory evidence that the person is licensed under this chapter when the person does not have the person’s license on or about the person’s person shall be prima-facie evidence of the person’s not having obtained a driver’s license.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree. *
(Emphasis added).
[bolding and underlining mine]
In Wisconsin, you should theoretically carry your license at all times that you’re operating a vehicle, but you may be all right if you’re able to later produce a license that was valid at the time that you were initially stopped.
Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 343: Operators’ Licenses (PDF)
In Oregon it is a Class C misdemeanor.
But if you will scroll down this police log from 2 days ago, Felipe gets arrested for failure to carry and present
I know of no “satisfactory proof” available to the typical driver other than the license itself.
But See ORS 807.570(3).
Except as provided in ORS 813.110, it is a defense to any charge under this section that the person so charged produce a license, driver permit or out-of-state license that had been issued to the person and was valid at the time of violation of this section.
that’s nice that you don’t know of any. what you wrote was still patently incorrect.
What would you suggest the motorist show, then? Most don’t carry around an affidavit from the BMV acknowledging that they have a valid DL.