 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Smith v. State6/1/2005
rohibits an act which the statute permits is impliedly preempted." Sands & Libonati Loc Govt Law §14.04. As a rule, " ity ordinances may not run counter to the general laws of the state as enacted in statutes." Allen v. The City of Oklahoma City, 1998 OK CR 42, 4, 965 P.2d 387, 389 (City enacted ordinance mandating 15-day jail sentence for offering to engage in a lewd act which conflicted with state law which gave municipal judges power to suspend or defer sentence).
The burden was on Smith to challenge the presumption of validity of the municipal ordinance. See Thomas v. The City of Oklahoma City, 1998 OK CIV APP 14, 955 P.2d 747. She presented evidence that she complied with the state statute and asked that the statute be noticed by the court.
Nonetheless, for the purpose of the case at bar, because there was no controlling precedent that City's ordinance was preempted, then it was presumptively valid at the time of the stop. See Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31, 99 S.Ct. 2627, 61 L.Ed. 2d 343 (1979). "Police are charged to enforce laws until and unless they are declared unconstitutional. The enactment of a law forecloses speculation by enforcement officers concerning its constitutionality - with the possible exception of a law so grossly and flagrantly unconstitutional that any person of reasonable prudence would be bound to see its flaws." Id. at 38, 2632. In the DeFillippo case, the United States Supreme Court held that a subsequent determination of invalidity of Detroit's ordinance on vagueness grounds (officer may stop and question individual if he has reasonable cause to believe the individual's behavior warrants further investigation for criminal activity) did not undermine the validity of the arrest. It further held that the evidence of contraband found in the subsequent search should not have been suppressed. As a result, in the instant case, the traffic stop was valid even though the Edmond City ordinance is inconsistent with state law.
Because we find that in the instant case the District Court erred in stopping the trial on appeal from the administrative hearing, we REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HANSEN, J., dissents, and JOPLIN, P.J., concurs.
Page 1 2 3 Oklahoma DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|