D.N.S., PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutional Scrutiny cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review D.N.S. v. State, 772 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), in which the Second District Court of Appeal certified the following questions to be of great public importance:
AT WHAT LEVEL OF SCRUTINY MUST A COURT EXAMINE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE?
IS THE TAMPA JUVENILE CURFEW ORDINANCE CONSTITUTIONAL?
Id. at 17. 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 a question similar to the instant 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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. J.P., 907 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 2004)…Florida “strict scrutiny applies when reviewing a juvenile curfew ordinance.” T.M., 784 So. 2d at 444; see also J.P., 788 So. 2d at 953; R.J.H. v. State, 788 So. 2d 952, 952 (Fla.2001); J.A. v. State, 788 So. 2d 953, 954 (Fla.2001); D.N.S. v. State, 788 So. 2d 955, 955 (Fla.2001); M.R. v. State, 788 So. 2d 957, 958 (Fla.2001).1 This Court recognizes that foreign jurisdictions addressing the constitutionality of juvenile curfew ordinances have incorporated the minors’ status into the equal protection framewor…
-
Harris v. State, 790 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…consider the issue raised on appeal in light of Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000); State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla.2000); McKnight v. State, 769 So. 2d 1039 (Fla.2000); and Ellis v. State, 762 So. 2d 912 (Fla.2000). See State v. Harris, 788 So. 2d 955 (Fla.2001). Upon reconsideration, we now hold that the Defendant’s sentence under both the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act and the Habitual Violent Felony Offender Act was not a double jeopardy violation. However, the trial court erred in sentencin…
-
D.N.S. v. State, 832 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…1996). She argues that the ordinance is unconstitutional. This court previously rejected her argument and affirmed the trial court’s determination that the ordinance was constitutional. See D.N.S. v. State, 772 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), quashed, 788 So. 2d 955 (Fla.2001). In affirming the trial court, this court applied the heightened scrutiny test. See State v. T.M., 761 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), quashed, 784 So. 2d 442 (Fla.2001). However, this court also certified two questions to the Florida Sup…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- T.M. v. State, 784 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 2001)
- D.N.S. v. State, 772 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)