Case Name: M.R., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2000-11-01
Citations: 777 So. 2d 995
Docket Number: No. 2D99-4040
Parties: M.R., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., Concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 777
Pages: 995–995

Head Matter:
M.R., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 2D99-4040.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Nov. 1, 2000.
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.

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.