D.P. v. State

705 So.2d 593 (1997)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

County enacted a comprehensive anti-graffiti ordinance. The ordinance prohibits the making of graffiti and establishes the responsibility of property owners to remove graffiti promptly. It prohibits the sale of spray paint or broad-tipped markers to minors or so-called jumbo marker. The ordinance does not prohibit the possession of ordinary-sized felt tip markers. Sellers of spray paint and jumbo markers are required to keep them in a place not accessible to the public, such as a locked display case. The goods must be stored within sight of a workstation which is continuously occupied while the store is open. It is a misdemeanor to possess spray paint or jumbo markers with intent to make graffiti. That portion of the ordinance applies to all persons, be they adult or minor. No person under the age of eighteen (18) shall have in his or her possession any aerosol container or spray paint or broad-tipped indelible marker while on any public property, highway, street, alley or way except in the company of a supervising adult. No person under the age of eighteen (18) shall have in his or her possession any aerosol container of spray paint or broad-tipped indelible marker while on any private property unless the owner, agent, or manager, or person in possession of the property knows of the minor's possession of the aerosol container or marker and has consented to the minor's possession while on his or her property. A petition for delinquency was filed against D alleging violation of the ordinance. D entered a plea of no contest, reserving the right to appeal the trial court order holding the ordinance constitutional. D appealed. D argues that the ordinance violates the due process clauses of the state and federal constitutions because the ordinance imposes a criminal penalty for a minor's possession of spray paint or jumbo markers without the State being required to show that the minor had any criminal intent. D contends that this is the criminalization of innocent conduct.