Overbreadth Doctrine

1,059 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 99 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• People Acting Through Community Effort v. Doorley
  468 F.2d 1143· 1st Cir.· 1972-11-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the ordinance's exception for labor picketing while prohibiting other residential picketing violates the Equal Protection Clause.
• Schneider v. Laird
  453 F.2d 345· 10th Cir.· 1972-01-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the military regulation allowing a commander to restrict on-base publication distribution is constitutional and its application in this case did not violate constitutional principles.
• Wilson v. Millard Gooding
  431 F.2d 855· 5th Cir.· 1970-08-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a single district judge has jurisdiction to hear a habeas corpus petition challenging the constitutionality of a state statute, and affirmed the district court's finding that the statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.
• Comstock v. United States
  419 F.2d 1128· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Washington unlawful assembly statute is not unconstitutional on its face, as its terms have well-established common law definitions and can be constitutionally interpreted.
• Reddy v. United States
  403 F.2d 26· 1st Cir.· 1968-11-01 ·cited 10×
  The defendant lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute on the grounds of overbreadth, as the statute clearly encompasses his own conduct.
• Captain Howard Brett Levy v. Honorable Howard F. Corcoran
  389 F.2d 929· D.C. Cir.· 1967-06-07 ·cited 10×·via Constitutional Overbreadth
  The court denied the petition for a writ of mandamus and application for a stay, finding that the petitioner had an adequate remedy at law and that the court lacked jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief against military proceedings.
• O.p.-G. v. State
  290 So. 3d 950· Fla. 3d DCA· 2019-10-16 ·cited 9×
  The appellate court affirmed a juvenile's delinquency finding for disrupting a school function. The court held that the statute prohibiting disruption of school functions applies to off-campus conduct that creates a foreseeable risk of substantial disruption to school activities,
• Gonzalez v. State
  948 So. 2d 892· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-02-09 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the statutes criminalizing dealing in stolen property were constitutional, but the restitution award was not supported by sufficient evidence for the full amount.
• Long v. State
  622 So. 2d 536· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-07-28 ·cited 9×
  Jean Long was convicted under Florida Statute 817.567 for falsely claiming to possess an academic degree. The First District Court of Appeal upheld the statute's constitutionality against a facial overbreadth challenge, construing it to require intentional misrepresentation based
• Stretton v. Disciplinary Bd. OF THE Supreme Court OF Pa.
  944 F.2d 137· 3d Cir.· 1991-09-09 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Pennsylvania's Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 7(B)(1)(c), prohibiting judicial candidates from announcing views on disputed legal or political issues, is constitutional when narrowly construed to apply only to issues likely to come before the court; however,
• Alabama Student Party v. Student Gov't Ass'n OF THE Univ. OF Ala.
  867 F.2d 1344· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-16 ·cited 9×
  The court held that university election regulations are permissible if they are reasonable and serve legitimate pedagogical concerns, even if they restrict student speech.
• United States v. Stansell
  847 F.2d 609· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 9×
  The court held that defendants were not entitled to a jury trial because the offense was petty, and the regulation they were convicted under was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad when reasonably construed in context.
• BSA, Inc. v. King Cnty.
  804 F.2d 1104· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-20 ·cited 9×
  The court held that ordinances banning barroom nude dancing violate the First Amendment because they are overbroad and not justified by substantial governmental interests. Distance requirements, however, are permissible time, place, and manner regulations.
• Star Satellite, Inc. v. City OF Biloxi
  779 F.2d 1074· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-03 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the appellant failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its constitutional or state law claims regarding the zoning ordinance's time re
• Graham v. State
  362 So. 2d 924· Fla.· 1978-09-14 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague, but reversed the conviction because the jury instructions may have allowed conviction based on negligence rather than willfulness.
• Livingston v. Garmire
  442 F.2d 1322· 5th Cir.· 1971-05-10 ·cited 9×·via Statutory Overbreadth
  A federal court cannot enjoin a pending state criminal prosecution unless the plaintiff proves great and immediate irreparable injury, and mere vagueness or overbreadth of a statute is insufficient without bad faith or harassment.
• League of Women Voters of Fla. Inc. v. Fla. Sec'y of State
  32 F.4th 1363· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The Eleventh Circuit granted Florida's motion to stay a district court's injunction against election laws, finding the district court's findings of intentional discrimination and unconstitutional vagueness/overbreadth were sufficiently vulnerable to warrant a stay pending appeal,
• Jefferson Eugene Davis v. Gilchrist Cnty. Sheriff's Off.
  280 So. 3d 524· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-09-25 ·cited 8×
  The RPO statute does not require proof of serious or recurring mental illness; instead, a court may issue an RPO based on threatening and erratic behavior demonstrating mental or emotional instability. The trial court's findings of fact were supported by clear and convincing evid
• Bankshot Billiards, Inc. v. City OF Ocala
  634 F.3d 1340· 11th Cir.· 2011-03-11 ·cited 8×·via Overbreadth Challenge
  Bankshot Billiards challenged a City of Ocala ordinance restricting entry of persons under twenty-one to alcohol-serving establishments, claiming the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague under the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court declared the ordinance facially vague an
• State v. DuFRESNE
  782 So. 2d 888· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's judgment that Florida's child abuse statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad as applied to a teacher charged with abusing autistic children. The court held the statute was not substantially overbroad
• Daley v. City OF Sarasota
  752 So. 2d 124· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-03-08 ·cited 8×
  Arthur Daley challenges a Sarasota noise ordinance prohibiting all amplified sound from non-enclosed structures during specified hours, arguing it violates the First Amendment by being overbroad. The District Court of Appeal holds the ordinance unconstitutional because it suppres
• Balasco v. Gulf Auto Holding, Inc.
  707 So. 2d 858· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-03-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the nonpiracy agreement is enforceable but remanded to reduce the duration of the restraint to two years, as the original three-year period was presumptively unreasonable.
• Centerfold Club, Inc. v. City of St. Petersburg
  969 F. Supp. 1288· M.D. Fla.· 1997-05-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Adult Use Zoning Regulation is a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction, and that the City had a reasonable basis for enacting it based on studies from other cities. The court also found that the ordinance provides reasonable alternative avenu
• State v. T.B.D.
  656 So. 2d 479· Fla.· 1995-06-15 ·cited 8×
  Florida Statute § 876.18, prohibiting the unauthorized placing of a burning or flaming cross on another's property, is constitutional because it regulates conduct that constitutes threats of violence and fighting words, categories of speech with no essential value to the expositi
• State v. Davis
  623 So. 2d 622· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-09-08 ·cited 8×
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's decision that a Florida statute criminalizing lewd acts was unconstitutional. The court found the statute was not vague, overbroad, sexually discriminatory, or violative of the single-subject rule, and that the state had a compelling i
• Topanga Press, Inc. v. City OF LOS Angeles
  989 F.2d 1524· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the City's Adult Entertainment Business Zoning Ordinance because the City may not have provided constitutionally sufficient alternative relocation s
• United States v. Kaufmann
  985 F.2d 884· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-02 ·cited 8×·via Overbreadth Challenge
  The court held that it has appellate jurisdiction over the conviction and sentence, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for attempted money laundering.
• Nat'l Advertising Co. v. The City & Cnty. OF Denver
  912 F.2d 405· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Denver's new ordinance regulating billboards near freeways is facially constitutional under the First Amendment, and that National's claims for damages and injunctive relief were properly denied.
• Sequoia Books, Inc. v. Ingemunson
  901 F.2d 630· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Illinois forfeiture provisions do not facially violate the First Amendment, are not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and that Sequoia has standing to challenge them. However, the provisions cannot be applied to convictions that occurred before the st
• S. Ent. Co. v. City of Boynton Beach
  736 F. Supp. 1094· S.D. Fla.· 1990-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the ordinance was void because the city failed to comply with state statutory notice requirements for its enactment, despite the ordinance otherwise being a valid time, place, and manner regulation under the First Amendment.
• Rankin v. Indep. Sch. Dist. NO. I-3
  876 F.2d 838· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an Oklahoma statute requiring tenured teachers to pay half the cost of a due process hearing is facially unconstitutional as it imposes an impermissible burden on the right to due process, and that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence of protected speec
• Action FOR Children's Television v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  852 F.2d 1332· D.C. Cir.· 1988-07-29 ·cited 8×
  The court upheld the FCC's generic definition of indecency but vacated its new channeling approach, finding it inadequately justified and potentially violative of the First Amendment.
• Howell v. State BAR OF Tex.
  843 F.2d 205· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(5) of the Texas Supreme Court's disciplinary scheme is not unconstitutionally overbroad or vague as applied to attorneys.
• Jones v. Cont'l Ins.
  670 F. Supp. 937· S.D. Fla.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Florida Statutes Section 624.155(1)(b)(1) applies to first-party actions and is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and that the plaintiff stated a claim under it. The court also dismissed claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and tort
• DeWEESE v. Town OF Palm Beach
  812 F.2d 1365· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Town of Palm Beach's ordinance prohibiting individuals from appearing in public without covering their upper bodies is unconstitutional as applied to male joggers because it is not rationally related to any legitimate government interest.
• Falzone v. State
  500 So. 2d 1337· Fla.· 1987-01-05 ·cited 8×·via Overbreadth Challenge
  Sam Falzone was indicted for failing to file a statement of organization as a political committee under Florida's Campaign Finance Law. He challenged the constitutionality of the statute as vague and overbroad, but the Florida Supreme Court upheld the law's facial validity, rejec
• Boston Teachers Union, Local 66, AFT, AFL-CIO v. Edgar
  787 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the case was moot because the underlying dispute had ended and there was no longer a live controversy, and the exceptions to the mootness doctrine did not apply.
• State v. Short
  483 So. 2d 10· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-10-25 ·cited 8×·via Statutory Overbreadth
  The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's dismissal of an indictment against a sheriff for official misconduct, holding that Florida's official misconduct statute—specifically the provision criminalizing falsification of official records—is constitution
• Milliman v. State OF Minn.
  774 F.2d 247· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the search warrant was not unconstitutionally overbroad and the use of grand jury subpoenas for evidence gathering, even without presenting to a grand jury, did not violate the appellant's constitutional rights.
• Hill v. The City OF Houston
  764 F.2d 1156· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-11 ·cited 8×
  The dissent argues that the Houston ordinance was constitutionally applied to Raymond Hill, as his speech did not outweigh the city's interest in law enforcement and was not substantially protected by the First Amendment.
• Clean-Up '84 v. Heinrich
  582 F. Supp. 125· M.D. Fla.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction should be granted to prevent the enforcement of Fla. Stat. § 104.36, as it likely violates First Amendment rights by being overbroad and not the least restrictive means of regulating election conduct.
• Forest Hills Early Learning Ctr., Inc. v. Lukhard
  728 F.2d 230· 4th Cir.· 1984-02-07 ·cited 8×·via Facial Overbreadth Doctrine
  The court held that the statutory exemption for religiously affiliated child care centers from general licensing requirements is facially overbroad as a permissible accommodation to free exercise rights, and thus summary judgment for the state was improper.
• United States v. Hensel
  711 F.2d 1000· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statutes under which appellants were convicted were constitutional and that there was sufficient evidence to support their convictions. Claims regarding evidentiary rulings and jury instructions were also found to be without merit.
• Davenport v. City OF Alexandria
  710 F.2d 148· 4th Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the permit scheme for performances in designated open spaces is constitutional, but remanded the case for factual findings regarding whether the ordinance's ban on sidewalk performances is narrowly tailored to serve the city's interest in public safety.
• The United States Jaycees v. McCLURE
  709 F.2d 1560· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-07 ·cited 8×
  The dissent argues that the Jaycees' right of association can be subordinated to the state's interest in preventing sex discrimination in public accommodations, and that the statute is neither vague nor overbroad as applied.
• United States v. Bader
  698 F.2d 553· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for violating federal building regulations were valid, rejecting claims of insufficient proof, First Amendment violations, and procedural errors regarding counsel rights.
• Lamar v. Fred Banks
  684 F.2d 714· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Georgia 'fighting words' statute is not facially unconstitutional, but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether it was unconstitutionally applied.
• Dash, Inc. v. The Alcoholic Bev. Control Appeals Bd.
  683 F.2d 1229· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that California's procedure for revoking liquor licenses, including administrative hearings and appellate review, provided sufficient procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, even with restrictions on administrative agencies declaring statutes unconst
• State v. Se. Fisheries Ass'n, Inc.
  415 So. 2d 1326· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-06-18 ·cited 8×
  Florida's Department of Natural Resources appealed a trial court's summary judgment invalidating a statute prohibiting the use and possession of fish traps. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding the statute is not unconstitutionally vague, not preempted by federal
• Valente v. Larson
  637 F.2d 562· 8th Cir.· 1981-01-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the religious exemption in the Minnesota Charitable Solicitations Act was unconstitutionally discriminatory in its classification and must be expanded to apply to all religious organizations.