People v. Garth
Before: Boren
[1799]
Opinion
BOREN, J.
Facts
Appellant received a parking ticket for parking his unhooked boat trailer on a street in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (the City), in violation of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code section 10.04.010 (the ordinance).
1
After a court trial, appellant was ordered to pay a fine of $10, plus court costs and penalty assessment, for a total of $28.
On appeal, appellant contends, as he did at trial, that the ordinance is preempted by, and inconsistent with, state law. We affirm.
Discussion
Appellant correctly contends that the field of traffic control, including vehicular parking regulations, is preempted by state law. “The state’s plenary power and its preemption of the entire field of traffic control are stated in Vehicle Code section 21: ‘Except as otherwise expressly provided, the provisions of this code are applicable and uniform throughout the state and in all counties and municipalities therein, and no local authority shall enact or enforce any ordinance on the matters covered by this code unless expressly authorized therein.’ Thus, unless ‘expressly provided’ by the Legislature, a city has no authority over vehicular traffic control.”
(Rumford
v.
City of Berkeley
(1982) 31 Cal.3d 545, 550 [183 Cal.Rptr. 73, 645 P.2d 124], citations and italics omitted.)
However, the Legislature has delegated to local governments the authority to regulate vehicular parking within their jurisdictions. Pertinent here is Vehicle Code section 22507, which provides in relevant part: “Local authorities may, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles,[
2
] including, but not limited to, vehicles
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)