Morera-Munoz

People v. Morera-Munoz

Good Law
2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 999·210 Cal. Rptr. 3d 409·5 Cal. App. 5th 838
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 18, 2016A148325California8,110 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dondero, J.

The People challenge the San Francisco Superior Court appellate division’s decision finding unconstitutional Vehicle Code section 31, which criminalizes the making of false statements to law enforcement officers while they are engaged in the performance of their duties under that code. Specifically, the appellate division invalidated section 31 on the ground that it improperly restricts speech in contravention of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution because the statute’s application is not expressly restricted to the making of “material” misstatements. Based on this conclusion, the appellate division reversed defendant’s conviction. The People argue that the statute may be construed or reformed to include a materiality provision, thereby curing any constitutional deficiencies. Construing the statute to include such a provision, we conclude the statute is not constitutionally infirm. In light of this, the jury should have been instructed on the element of materiality. Under the circumstances of this case, however, we conclude the instructional error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the appellate division and…

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.