State v. McElroy, Minn.Ct.App., 4/8/2013. Mr. McElroy drives some nice wheels: a 1984 Monte Carlo cream-soda pop colored low rider with brown anodized rims. And a nice sound system that you could hear if not a mile away then at least fifty feet. At 4:00 in the afternoon an officer was directing traffic when Mr. McElroy rolled by; the cop asked Mr. McElroy to turn down the volume, but He kept rolling. He eventually turned down the volume but not before the cop cited him for violating a Minneapolis noise ordinance. Mr. McElroy claimed that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, that the state failed to prove the element of amplification, and that the judge should not have told the jury that it had to reach a verdict. The court of appeals rejects each of these claims.
The ordinance prohibits blasting your car stereo so loudly that “any person from a distance of fifty (50) feet or more from the vehicle” can hear it. The court of appeals concludes that this ordinance is neither vague nor overbroad. It applies to all music and entertainment amplified from a vehicle and is thus content neutral. And, the state has a legitimate interest in controlling the noise level on streets.
The court also rejected Mr. McElroy’s evidence sufficiency claim. It also rejected the jury instruction error under a plain error standard of review.
No comments:
Post a Comment