People v. Garcia CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 18, 2024B323974California2,501 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cody, J.

DISCUSSION

Section 29900(a)(1) Constitutionality Appellant contends Bruen requires reversing his conviction under section 29900(a)(1), which prohibits individuals previously

3 convicted of certain violent offenses from possessing or owning firearms.2 We disagree. “A facial challenge to the constitutional validity of a statute or ordinance considers only the text of the measure itself, not its application to the particular circumstances of an individual.” (Tobe v. City of Santa Ana (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1069, 1084.) “The interpretation of a statute and the determination of its constitutionality are questions of law. In such cases, appellate courts apply a de novo standard of review.” (People v. Health Laboratories of North America, Inc. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 442, 445.) A facial constitutional challenge may be raised for the first time on appeal. (In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 887-889.) “‘To support a determination of facial unconstitutionality, voiding the statute as a whole, petitioners cannot prevail by suggesting that in some future hypothetical situation constitutional problems may possibly arise as to the particular application of the statute. . . .’” (Arcadia Unified…

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.