RJH v. State

779 So. 2d 391, 2000 WL 801175
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in RJH v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 7854
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 23, 2000·No. 2D97-2297·Published

Opinion

779 So.2d 391 (2000)

R.J.H., A Child, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D97-2297.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 23, 2000.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Richard J. Sanders, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, for Appellee.

James D. Palermo, City Attorney, and Jerry M. Gewirtz, Assistant City Attorney, Tampa, for the City of Tampa, Amicus Curiae.

DAVIS, Judge.

R.J.H. appeals the trial court's adjudication of delinquency for violating Tampa's juvenile curfew ordinance. See Tampa, Fla., Code § 14-26(c) (1996). We reject R.J.H.'s contention that the ordinance is unconstitutional and affirm under the authority of 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.

CASANUEVA, J., concurs.

NORTHCUTT, A.C.J., dissents with opinion.

NORTHCUTT, J., dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. See State v. T.M., 761 So.2d 1140 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (Northcutt, J., dissenting).

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

RJH v. State, 779 So. 2d 391, 2000 WL 801175 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

779 So. 2d 391 (RJH v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. T.M.
761 So. 2d 1140 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
J.P. v. State
775 So. 2d 324 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)