EXPIRED IDENTIFICATION IS VALID IDENTIFICATION PURSUANT TO WASHINGTON LAW RCW 46.20.005, RCW 46.20.015 & RCW 46.20.

035
The following three (3) Washington Statutes make it clear that an EXPIRED IDENTIFICATION is VALID IDENTIFICATION. (Emphasis added).

RCW 46.20.035 Proof of identity. The department may not issue an identicard or a Washington state driver's license that is valid for identification purposes unless the applicant meets the identification requirements of subsection (1), (2), or (3) of this section. (1) A driver's license or identicard applicant must provide the department with at least one of the following pieces of valid identifying documentation that contains the signature and a photograph of the applicant: (a) A VALID OR RECENTLY EXPIRED DRIVER'S LICENSE or instruction permit that includes the date of birth of the applicant; (b) A Washington state identicard or an identification card issued by another state; . . . (3) A person unable to provide identifying documentation as specified in subsection (1) or (2) of this section may request that the department review other available documentation in order to ascertain identity. The department may waive the requirement if it finds that other documentation clearly establishes the identity of the applicant. . . . (5) If the applicant is unable to prove his or her identity under this section, the department shall plainly label the license "not valid for identification purposes." RCW 46.20.005 Driving without a license--Misdemeanor, when. Except as expressly exempted by this chapter, it is a misdemeanor for a person to drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state without a valid driver's license issued to washington residents under this chapter. This section does not apply if at the time of the stop the person is not in violation of rcw 46.20.342(1) or 46.20.420 AND HAS IN HIS OR HER POSSESSION AN EXPIRED DRIVER'S LICENSE Or other valid identifying documentation UNDER RCW 46.20.035. A violation of this section is a lesser included offense within the offenses described in RCW 46.20.342(1) or 46.20.420.[1997 c 66 1.] And; RCW 46.20.015 Driving without a license--Traffic infraction, when. (1) Except as expressly exempted by this chapter, it is a traffic infraction and not a misdemeanor under RCW 46.20.005 if a person: . . . (b) PROVIDES THE CITING OFFICER WITH AN EXPIRED DRIVER'S LICENSE or other valid identifying documentation under RCW 46.20.035 at the time of the stop, . . .

It is a well established principle of common law that I am free to adopt and use any name that I choose for any lawful purpose. There is NO requirement that I use a State issued Identification in Washington State.
Under well established principles of common law, a person is free to adopt and use any name that he or she sees fit so long as it is not done for any fraudulent purposes and does not infringe

upon the rights of others. 57 Am. Jur. 2d Name sections 1, 10 (1971); Attorney General Opinion, Jan. 30. 1928. DOE v. DUNNING, 87 Wn.2d 50, 549 P.2d 1 [No. 43907. En Banc. April 22, 1976.] And; In the manner of the choice of a name for a person, it is fundamental law that any person may use any name he sees fit, provided that the use thereof is not with the intent to defraud. Washington State Attorney General Opinion, January 30, 1928. And; In the matter of the choice of a name for a person, it is fundamental law that any person may use any name he sees fit, provided that the use thereof is not with the intent to defraud. The custom of person taking names from their male parent is merely a custom and is not binding upon anyone, and the same may be said of the custom of a woman taking her husbands name. In the matter of the choice of a name the individual has absolute liberty provided that a name is not assumed for the purpose of committing a fraud. [Emphasis supplied]. No mention was made of RCW 4.24.130 (then codified as RRS section 998) in that 1928 opinion. Nor, likewise, was any mention made of either that statute or RCW 26.09.150, supra (enacted in 1973) in the recent case of Doe v. Dunning, 87 Wn.2d 50, 549 P.2d 1 (1976) in which the Washington Supreme Court, at page 53, set forth the same basic common law principle as follows: Under well established principles of common law, a person is free to adopt and use, absent a statute to the contrary, any name that he or she sees fit so long as it is not done for any fraudulent purposes and does not infringe upon the rights of others. . . . This common law right applies as well to the surname of married women. While it may be considered customary for a woman to take her husbands surname upon marriage, it is custom only and not a legal requirement. . . . [Emphasis supplied]. In our opinion the point, quite simply, is that both RCW 4.24.130 and RCW 26.09.150 are by their own express terms, permissive and not mandatory. Under the former a person desiring to change his or her name (or that of his or her minor child or ward) may apply therefor to the superior court of the county in which he or she resides. In turn, by following that procedure the individual can obtain an official court order attesting to the particular name change involved. But the statute does not purport to require that this formal procedure be followed in order to effectuate a change in name. Therefore, RCW 4.24.130 is not a statute to the contrary within the purview of the common law rule. WASHINGTON STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION, AGO 1985 No. 10 (June 27, 1985). And; [5, 7] The great weight of authority recognizes that at common law one was free to change his name without legal proceedings and that statutory name change procedures do not supplant this right but aid it by the official recordation of those changes. OGLE v. CIRCUIT CT., TENTH JUD. CIRCUIT, 227 N.W.2d 621, at 624 (April 4, 1975). And;

It is clear that the law clearly provides that I even have the right at common law to change my name without legal proceedings in a State Court. It is also undisputed that the Revised Code of Washington does NOT contain any statute that requires that an I.D. be issued only by the State or Federal Government. Costco ID, bank cards or any other ID with your picture is good also!!!! If you are refused any benefit, privilege or entrance to any government building or private business for failure to produce government issued identification, contact Luis Ewing at (253) 226-3741 or <rcwcodebuster@aol.com> or <www.luisewing.com> or <www.ultimateusers.com> or <www.prosewinners.net> if you want to file a Civil Lawsuit!!!!