Raef

Raef v. Appellate Division of the Superior Court

Good Law
193 Cal. Rptr. 3d 159·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 856·240 Cal. App. 4th 1112
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 2015B259792California9,758 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

Paul Raef was charged with two violations of Vehicle Code section 40008, subdivision (a), which increases the punishment for reckless driving and other traffic offenses committed with the intent to capture an image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person for a commercial purpose. The trial court sustained Raef s demurrer and dismissed the charges on tire ground that the statute was unconstitutional. The Appellate Division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court reversed. Raef petitioned for a writ of mandate, and on direction by the California Supreme Court, we issued an order to show cause.

We conclude that section 40008 does not violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It is a law of general application that does not target speech or single out the press for special treatment and is neither vague nor overbroad. The petition is denied.

PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

In 2012, Raef was charged with driving in willful and wanton disregard for the safety of others (count 1) and following another vehicle too closely (count 2), both with the intent to capture a visual image of another person for a commercial purpose. (§ 40008.) He also…

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.