MR v. State
This text of 777 So. 2d 995 (MR v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
M.R., Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Brad Permar, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
WHATLEY, Judge.
M.R. appeals the trial court's adjudication of delinquency for violating Tampa's juvenile curfew ordinance. See Tampa, Fla., Code § 14-26(c) (1996). He argues that the ordinance is unconstitutional. We affirm under the authority of this court's recent decisions in J.P. v. State, 775 So.2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), and State v. T.M., 761 So.2d 1140 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
We again certify the following questions of great public importance:
WHAT LEVEL OF SCRUTINY MUST A COURT APPLY WHEN REVIEWING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A JUVENILE CURFEW ORDNANCE?
WHETHER THE TAMPA JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE IS CONSTITUTIONAL?
Affirmed.
PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., Concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
777 So. 2d 995, 2000 WL 1629302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mr-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.