From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Daniel W.

Supreme Court of California
Jan 18, 1996
49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 206 (Cal. 1996)

Opinion


Page __

__ Cal.4th __ 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 206, 909 P.2d 328 In re DANIEL W., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. PEOPLE, Respondent, v. DANIEL W., Appellant. S047230. Supreme Court of California Jan. 18, 1996

         Prior report: Cal.App., 41 Cal.Rptr.2d 202.

         Because it appears from a review of the record herein that the constitutional issues on which this court granted review were not raised in the trial court (see, e.g., C.T. at p. 35 [conceding that the "ordinance as written is constitutional"] ), and in view of Michigan v. DeFillippo (1979) 443 U.S. 31, 38, 99 S.Ct. 2627, 2632, 61 L.Ed.2d 343; Illinois v. Krull (1987) 480 U.S. 340, 349, 107 S.Ct. 1160, 1166, 94 L.Ed.2d 364; and In re Hector R. (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 1146, 1152, 200 Cal.Rptr. 110 ("An arrest made in good faith reliance on an ordinance [even though] subsequently declared to be unconstitutional is made with probable cause and is valid"), review in the above-captioned matter is dismissed pursuant to rule 29.4(c), California Rules of Court, and the cause is remanded to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District.

         The request for an order directing publication of the opinion is denied.

         LUCAS, C.J., and MOSK, KENNARD, ARABIAN, BAXTER and GEORGE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Daniel W.

Supreme Court of California
Jan 18, 1996
49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 206 (Cal. 1996)
Case details for

In re Daniel W.

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE, Respondent, v. DANIEL W., Appellant.

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 18, 1996

Citations

49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 206 (Cal. 1996)
909 P.2d 328

Citing Cases

Nunez v. City of San Diego

We note two later California appellate court decisions on juvenile curfews that have been ordered not…