J.E.J., JR., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
J.E.J., JR., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
505 So. 2d 516
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1987)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the appellant’s conviction and reject his contention that section 800.04, Florida Statutes (1985), is unconstitutionally vague when applied to children under sixteen years of age. Accordingly, as in L.L.N. v. State, 504 So. 2d 6, on rehearing (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), we declare section 800.-04, Florida Statutes (1985), to be valid.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER and HALL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. J.A.S., 686 So. 2d 1366 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…xception for perpetrators under sixteen does not render the statute unconstitutional. It simply means that the legislature intended no such distinction. The second district re-affirmed this holding without any further discussion in J.E.J. v. State, 505 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 513 So. 2d 1061 (Fla.1987). As noted, review in both cases was denied by the supreme court. The latest pronouncement on the subject of sexual activity between consenting 16 year olds is set forth in B.B. v. State, 659 So…
-
Allstate Ins. v. Bailey, 723 F. Supp. 665 (M.D. Fla. 1989)…800.04 (1987); L.L.N. v. State, 504 So.2d 6 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986) (per curiam), review denied, 511 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1987) (§ 800.04 is not unconstitutionally vague when applied to perpetrators under the age of 16); J.E.J. v. State, 505 So.2d 516 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.) (per curiam), review denied, 513 So.2d 1061 (Fla.1987) (same holding).…
Authorities Cited
- L.L.N. v. State, 504 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)