T.F., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the Bradenton Beach curfew ordinance is unconstitutional. However, the adjudication of delinquency for alcohol possession is affirmed.
A sixteen-year-old was adjudicated delinquent for possessing alcohol and violating a city curfew ordinance. The ordinance prohibited minors from being…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Violation Of City Ordinance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
T.F., a sixteen year old child, was adjudicated delinquent for possession of alcohol by a minor (count I) and a violation of Bradenton Beach, Fla., Ordinance No. 110 (1969) (count II). She attacks the constitutionality of the curfew ordinance (No. 110) which reads in pertinent part as follows:
SECTION 1.
It shall be unlawful for any person sixteen (16) years of age or under to be on the streets, alleys or other public places within the City limits of Bradenton Beach, Florida, between the hours of 11:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M.
SECTION 2.
All persons sixteen (16) years of age or under shall be exempt from the provisions of SECTION 1. hereunder when they are in the company of an adult.
We hereby declare ordinance No. 110 unconstitutional for the reasons set forth in our opinion issued this date in S. W. v. State, 431 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The rationale of that case is more compelling here because the Bradenton Beach ordinance does not even purport to make exceptions for legitimate nocturnal pursuits of minors in public places.
T.F. admitted the charge of possession of alcohol. Therefore, notwithstanding the invalidity of the ordinance, we affirm the order of commitment predicated on count I.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Aristides MacHado v. State, 431 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- S.W. v. State, 431 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)