| Court: | US Supreme Court |
| Facts: | There's a report of some domestic violence. The cops show up, and there's Hiibel, in a situation mostly like what the report described. They ask him for ID, and he declines. Arresting ensues. |
| Posture: | Convicted at trial, affirmed on appeal; NV supreme court declines to hear the fifth amendment challenge. Appeal. |
| Issue: | Is it a violation of fourth or fifth amendment rights to require ID? |
| Holding: | Not per se, and not in this case. |
| Rule: | The fifth amendment would only protect if the communication were testimonial, incriminating, and compelled. The request for ID is authorized by NV statute. |
| Reasoning: | ID is not incriminating in this case. Maybe not testimonial either. Fourth Amendement protections are balanced against the promotion of legitimate government interests: the NV statute requiring ID is such an interest. |
| Dicta: | |