Regardless of his experience, we already know that failing to present a driver license is an infraction under California Vehicle Code Section 12951. The hassle of going to court to provide proof of having a valid driver license on the date of the arrest for a full dismissal doesn't make it "legal" in my book.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will US cops accept digitized US driver licenses?
- Thread starter moonman239
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Regardless of his experience, we already know that failing to present a driver license is an infraction under California Vehicle Code Section 12951. The hassle of going to court to provide proof of having a valid driver license on the date of the arrest for a full dismissal doesn't make it "legal" in my book.
Count me as one guy who can't wait until digitized ID is accepted. I would quite literally not need a wallet then.
I am not so sure about that Lloydbm41. You might have a digital copy of your DL and maybe even insurance information. That does not mean a officer of the law is obligated to accept that digital information. That won't prevent them from issuing a citation for you to appear and provide proof. I for one do not want to be the guy that makes it difficult to prove I have the required information. It could be the difference between a citation and a just a warning.
It's too early for this to happen regularly, but ask again in five years.
I suspect that there will come a point where your phone will have a "digital wallet" that allows access to things like your license and insurance information (or whatever else you choose the make accessible) instead of having to have total access to your device. The usage case just hasn't been fully thought out yet.
I suspect that there will come a point where your phone will have a "digital wallet" that allows access to things like your license and insurance information (or whatever else you choose the make accessible) instead of having to have total access to your device. The usage case just hasn't been fully thought out yet.
What will happen is they will change the law to require police officers to accept the version on your phone. A similar issue came up with insurance cards in illinois, officers in IL have to accept ins cards on the phone. Currently in IL you must have your DL on you when you drive otherwise you can be issued a citation for failure to produce.
I see a few issues with a digital wallet and law enforcement. "I would show you my DL officer but....my phone is dead!" I wasn't texting officer I was getting my phone ready to show you my DL and insurance" Or a clumsy law enforcement officer drops your phone and cracks your screen. What if it is raining and your phone gets wet? Officer takes phone back to his car to run your DL and insurance......phone locks again.
If it ever becomes a law, they'll likely implement some kind of scanner to check the digital DL while inside the vehicle and make it more far more lenient than the current restrictive vehicle codes that impose a large fine for not being able to produce the DL (i.e., a dead or defective phone).
People who are opposed to that will still have the option of carrying a physical DL.
E-Drivers License Legislation in N.J. Gains Momentum
E-Drivers License Legislation in N.J. Gains Momentum
BY JEREMY ROSEN
SPECIAL TO NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
The N.J. Senate Transportation Committee passed bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senate Republican Leader Tom Kean to require the state Motor Vehicle Commission to study and make recommendations about implementing electronic drivers licenses and mobile applications.
Whenever feasible we must bring public services directly to where the people are, whether thats social media or mobile phones, said Kean (R-Union, Somerset, Morris). An e-drivers license will be more convenient for the vast majority of residents, while making one of the most-used government services more efficient and less costly.
Senator Kean said that the ideal e-drivers license program in New Jersey, resulting from Senate Bill 2695, would allow people to still use traditional plastic licenses if they want.
People are literally attached to their phones, with many of us opting to use mobile forms of payment, banking and credit, Kean said. New Jersey should be at the forefront of new technology and innovation in the safest way possible. We have an opportunity to be ahead of the curve in this instance and learn from and with Iowa and Delaware, which are aggressively working toward implementing e-drivers licenses.
Senate Transportation Committee Chairman Nicholas Sacco (D-Bergen, Hudson) is co-prime sponsor of S-2695.
Senator Kean also sponsors SCR-126, which dedicates all New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) surplus moneys to the states Transportation Trust Fund (TTF). In recent years, that surplus has been about $400 million per year and can be an even more significant annual funding source for the TTF as the MVC and its services become more efficient and technologically advanced with initiatives, such as the potential implementation of e-drivers licenses.
E-Drivers License Legislation in N.J. Gains Momentum
BY JEREMY ROSEN
SPECIAL TO NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
The N.J. Senate Transportation Committee passed bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senate Republican Leader Tom Kean to require the state Motor Vehicle Commission to study and make recommendations about implementing electronic drivers licenses and mobile applications.
Whenever feasible we must bring public services directly to where the people are, whether thats social media or mobile phones, said Kean (R-Union, Somerset, Morris). An e-drivers license will be more convenient for the vast majority of residents, while making one of the most-used government services more efficient and less costly.
Senator Kean said that the ideal e-drivers license program in New Jersey, resulting from Senate Bill 2695, would allow people to still use traditional plastic licenses if they want.
People are literally attached to their phones, with many of us opting to use mobile forms of payment, banking and credit, Kean said. New Jersey should be at the forefront of new technology and innovation in the safest way possible. We have an opportunity to be ahead of the curve in this instance and learn from and with Iowa and Delaware, which are aggressively working toward implementing e-drivers licenses.
Senate Transportation Committee Chairman Nicholas Sacco (D-Bergen, Hudson) is co-prime sponsor of S-2695.
Senator Kean also sponsors SCR-126, which dedicates all New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) surplus moneys to the states Transportation Trust Fund (TTF). In recent years, that surplus has been about $400 million per year and can be an even more significant annual funding source for the TTF as the MVC and its services become more efficient and technologically advanced with initiatives, such as the potential implementation of e-drivers licenses.
Maybe I missed it, but that page that doesn't mention smartphones, as far as I can see. What Maine means by "Digital" is that your photograph is taken digitally and then printed onto their cards instead of using old fashioned film, much like how the other 49 states are doing it now. Also, barcodes on the back.
You didn't miss it. I did! LOL
I knew there was another state mentioned and I did a quick search and Maine came up. I didn't bother to read through it.
The state I had in mind was Delaware, I guess? I thought it was a North Eastern state, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Delaware and Arizona are thinking about it, too. That said SCOTUS has ruled that cops need a warrant to search your phone. Ideally, these digital licenses will use PassBook or the lock screen so that you can show the cop your license without granting him access to the contents of your phone, 4th amendment notwithstanding.
----------
Apparently Dubai introduced them in December. But they don't have a 4th Amendment so I'd be suspicious of them if I lived there.
You bring up valid points about security. You could always open the Id and then set guided access. The cop can't leave the app without a four digit pin that way. This is, of course, assuming the ID isn't inolemented in a smarter way. My guess is it will be a specific app released by the state. But that's just a guess based on nothing terribly substantial.
I have been pulled over twice and just gave my name and bday and not been ticketed or warned. They can look it up online as I stated in my previous post.
Any cop in any state CAN do this - there's always quite a bit of leeway an officer has in determining whether or not having a DL on the person is important enough to ticket or not.
Why is this so important to people? Is carrying a very small card around really a hinderance to some people?
Not carrying it, in some cases, can be a problem. A cop could add on a ticket for this is they want to. You could be denied access to various facilities, and getting on flights will be more difficult (not impossible, it's not required to have ID to fly but TSA can take their time in verifying your identity).
Not only that, take a look at 40302 (a) CVC in conjuction with 40307 (b) CVC...... along with the infraction of not having your ID on you.
I don't care what they can do as a courtesy. As long as the state specifically requires having a DL in your immediate possession to avoid an infraction, you're not 100% risk free.
I would think, until the law specifically lays out digital drivers licenses (DL), you need to have your physical DL in your possession when operating a motor vehicle.
I have no idea why anyone would rely on a LEO's good will to avoid a ticket. It seems pretty simple to keep a physical DL on you while driving; why give the LEO the option to ticket you?
I am actually agreeing with you, but letting you know that it (all caps coming) CAN be done in every state.
But like mobilehaathi says, why would anyone count on a cop being nice and cutting you a break?
They need a warrant to search your phone without your consent. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that some police departments will interpret handing over your unlocked cellphone for an officer to bring back to their car and "make sure everything checks out" as constituting consent to examine the contents. Maybe a court would disagree with that, or maybe not. But settling the question would take some time.
That would be nice, but would either require that the license be up on the lock screen at all times, or that the police have some sort of iBeacon or bluetooth-based trigger on their cars or on their person, to let the phone know that its owner may need to retrieve that license via passbook. Since police officers are mobile outside of their precinct stations, an app can't rely on GPS to know this like most apps do.
Alternately, Apple could probably do something similar to the Medical ID, where it would be accessed at all times via the Emergency phone screen. As long as all 50 states are willing to cooperate with that arrangement. Even Medical ID is basically done ad hoc; maybe a first responder knows about it, maybe not.
Last edited:
Iowa, but I have an Illinois license. I live on the border.
----------
I sent a message to a former co-worker, retired cop of the state of Iowa. I asked him if it was illegal to drive without the physical card on you and explained I had been pulled over a few times without it in me and the cop just took my info and looked it up. I will report back with his answer.
You must only have your DL/OL on your person when operating a motor vehicle, or other vehicle in which a license is required by law (electric GEM Neighborhood Electric Vehicle's for instance, motorized bicycles, mopeds, etc.). Having your "papers" or DL on your person while out and about for a walk is not required, ever since the Supreme Court struck down California's Penal Code Section 647(e), which had similar wording to the case decision in Nevada Vs. Hiibel.
HOWEVER, this does not change the fact that you are legally required to identify your self or provide satisfactory evidence of identity should you be lawfully detained under any circumstance. ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. Being at a bar during a crime or bar fight- yes, legally detained pending the investigation to determine injuries, crimes, extent of injuries, and people's involvement in the crime. That can take a while as the scene is dynamic and chaotic.
Reliance on law enforcement databases to confirm your identity from name/dob/etc information YOU provide is not sufficient and is simply a matter of convenience should that law enforcement officer have access to a working in-vehicle computer that can access DMV/MVA datsabases that will produce a photograph and identifying information (height/weight/age/etc.) to confirm the info you provide verbally. Just providing it to a Park Range that can't do that, is NOT sufficient proof of identity should you be detained. A traffic stop, even if YOU ARE NOT DRIVING is still a lawful detention.
As a refresher- a lawful detention is when a police officer can articulate a reasonable suspicion that ANY crime (including a traffic infraction or minor municipal code) has occurred, is occurring, or about to occur and the person detained MAY be involved. Not PROBABLY, not DEFINITELY, but simply MAY.
If you disagree that you are being lawfully detained, your recourse is NOT TO RESIST OR BE A YOUTUBE OR CURBSIDE LAWYER. Your lawful recourse is civil suit after the fact. That is how people end up injured or dead.
A police officer is entitled, and in fact obligated, to use the reasonable amount of force necessary to effect a lawful detention, arrest, prevent escape or overcome resistance (or restore order to a custody facility).
If you blow off a cop who is ordering or directing you to do something, expect to be physically restrained, batoned or tased to effect that lawful detention. The definition of lawful is that which is viewed through a lens that the police officer believes is reasonable based on their articuable training and experience, per 1989's U. S. Supreme Court decision in Graham vs Connor. NOT ON YOUR OPINION OR KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT IS OCCURRING?
Food for thought for the rebels amongst us.
Last edited:
