Court Opinion

ID: 9654475
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 18:22:34.098192+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:09.724651
License: Public Domain

Cavanagh, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur only in the result of the majority with respect to the equal protection issue. Current and future plenary review of this issue is precluded until the United States Supreme Court affords the issue plenary review. However, I agree with Justice Brennan’s dissent in Colorado Springs Amusement, Ltd v Rizzo, 428 US 913; 96 S Ct 3228; 49 L Ed 2d 1221 (1976), that this Court should be able to review the merits of the equal protection argument. The merit of plaintiffs’ argument is at the very least colorable after the United States Supreme Court decision in JEB v Alabama ex rel TB, 511 US 127; 114 S Ct 1419; 128 L Ed 2d 89 (1994), which recognized an equal protection violation even though members of both sexes were excluded from participating in the jury process on the basis of their gender.
As to the issue of search without a warrant, I concur with the reasoning and result of Justice Kelly.