April 12, 2011, 16:47
nancy manningFalse Identification as Peace Officer
An officer who is no longer employed with a specific agency is flashing his badge (from this specific agency) at interesting times- like during an investigative stop for POM and when a business is repossessing his vehicle, etc. My problem is that in my reading of 37.12 it appears that (b)(2) provides a defense. He was a peace officer commissioned in that capacity when the item was made. So....am I missing something? Even if he has been stripped of his license at the time he flashed his badge it appears that the defense would still apply. I've not got into a lot of case law yet but was wondering if anybody else had dealt with something along these lines. Suggestions appreciated because this is unacceptable! Thanks.
April 12, 2011, 17:32
GretchenIs he flashing his badge with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts? If yes, take a look at 37.11.
April 13, 2011, 10:17
nancy manningGretchen, it will be a stretch, given our facts, but we have no other choice. Thanks for the input!
[This message was edited by nancy manning on 04-13-11 at .]
April 13, 2011, 12:16
GretchenAfter filing, how about you ask him to surrender the badge in exchange for dismissal?
April 13, 2011, 15:24
J AnsolabehereThere is a difference between a TCLEOSE license and a commission from agency that employs the officer. Does it matter than the officer may not have had a commmission from the former agency?
Janette A
April 13, 2011, 16:49
Gretchen@Rudy - I'm not sure that the badge itself is "false" since it was an actual badge issued to that person while they were, in fact, employed as a peace officer. I had thought about that too (it would be covered under the definition of "government record" in 37.01(2)(C)).
Was the officer required to surrender the badge upon his termination of employment? Could it be a theft?
April 14, 2011, 15:49
MDK27We don't need no stinking badges!
Sorry - couldn't resist.......
April 14, 2011, 19:01
MCarrollHow about looking under 39.03, Official Oppression. It sure appears he is acting under color of his office, albeit ex-office.