Hiibel V. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt CountyCitation: 542 US 177 (2004) Facts of the Case: The Sheriff's Department in Humboldt County , Nevada, responded to a 911 call reporting an assault. The 911 caller reported seeing a man assault a woman while she was driving a GMC truck on a local road. The sheriff's department responded by sending Deputy Sheriff Lee Dove to investigate. The officer arrived in the reported area and found the truck parked on the side of the road with a man standing next to it. The officer approached the truck and explained to the man that he was investigating a 911 call. The deputy then asked the man for identification and the man refused to provide the deputy with any form of identification. The deputy asked the man to provide his identity a total of 11 times and each time he refused. The deputy then warned the man that he would arrest him if he did not comply. The deputy proceeded to arrest the man and later discovered that the man's name was Larry D. Hiibel. He was charged with “willfully resisting, delaying, or obstructing a public officer in discharging or attempting to discharging any lawful duty of his office,” which is a Nevada statute called the “stop and identify” statute. Hiibel was convicted of the crime in Union Township Justice Court and fined $250. Hiibel then appealed his conviction to the Sixth Judicial District Court, the Nevada Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court. Case Issue: Arresting and convicting someone for failing to provide identification to law enforcement violates their Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate themselves and their Fourth Amendment right to be free from an unreasonable search ? Pr case...... at the center of the document ......and of the law enforcement databases. This information can then be used in a criminal case against that person. Case Impact on Discretion: The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in this case impacted discretion in favor of law enforcement and possibly the public. I believe that law enforcement should be able to ask a person suspected of having committed a crime to identify themselves. Without police discretion to ask suspects to identify the number of people taken into custody on unrelated warrants would surely decline because officers would not be able to check whether they have warrants without identifying them. Additionally, by identifying someone suspected of a crime, law enforcement can check the suspect's history to see if they have any prior charges related to the crime the person is suspected of committing..