M.R. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

M.R. v. State

777 So. 2d 995, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13886

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 1, 2000·No. No. 2D99-4040·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

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 ORDINANCE?

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

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 ORDINANCE?

WHETHER THE TAMPA JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE IS CONSTITUTIONAL?

Affirmed.

PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., Concur.

M.R. v. State, 777 So. 2d 995, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13886 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

777 So. 2d 995 (M.R. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related