Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Soto

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 6, 1985No. B014010PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McCLOSKY, Acting P. J.

In a complaint, respondent Jose Luis Soto was charged with violating Penal Code section 647,1 which provides: “Every person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor: [¶] . . . . [¶] (d) Who loiters in or about any toilet open to the public for the purpose of engaging in or soliciting any lewd or lascivious or any unlawful act.”

The municipal court sustained respondent’s demurrer to the complaint on two federal constitutional grounds. That court found that section 647, subdivision (d) encourages “arbitrary and erratic…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  5. Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  2. People v. SotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
  3. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  4. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API