Niebauer

People v. Niebauer

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 1055·214 Cal. App. 3d 1278·263 Cal. Rptr. 287
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 18, 1989D009461California5,431 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

After Robert A. Niebauer was convicted of driving with dark tinting material on the side windows of his 1987 Ford truck (Veh. Code, § 26708(a)), he unsuccessfully appealed to the appellate department of the San Diego Superior Court. A majority of that department affirmed the decision of the municipal court and certified the matter to this court to obtain uniformity of decision for what it perceived to be a direct conflict between its decision and a published decision of the appellate department of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, People v. Fink (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d Supp. 15 [ 215 Cal.Rptr. 236 ],

After certification, we asked the parties to submit supplemental briefing on the constitutionality of section 26708(a), on whether the rationale of People v. Fink should be followed, and on whether there was sufficient evidence in the record to support Niebauer’s conviction. Additionally, the Attorney General requested and received permission to file an amicus curiae brief on the issues in this case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 65.) For the reasons set forth below, we find section 26708(a) constitutional, People v. Fink limited to its own facts, and Niebauer’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.