J.P. v. State

788 So. 2d 953, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 413, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 1173, 2001 WL 660864
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 14, 2001·No. No. SC00-1445·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review J.P. v. State, 775 So.2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), in which the Second District Court of Appeal certified the following questions to be of great public importance:

WHAT LEVEL OF SCRUTINY MUST A COURT APPLY WHEN REVIEWING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE?
WHETHER THE TAMPA JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE IS CONSTITUTIONAL!;.]

Id. at 325. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution.

In T.M. v. State, 784 So.2d 442 (Fla.2001), we answered the first certified question by holding that strict scrutiny applies to juvenile curfew ordinances. As in T.M., we decline to answer the second certified question, quash the decision of the district court, and remand this case for further proceedings.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

J.P. v. State, 788 So. 2d 953, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 413, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 1173, 2001 WL 660864 (Fla. 2001).

788 So. 2d 953 (J.P. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. J.P.
907 So. 2d 1101 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2004)
J.P. v. State
832 So. 2d 110 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
State v. T.M.
832 So. 2d 118 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)