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

• State v. Brake
  796 So. 2d 522· Fla.· 2001-09-20 ·cited 64×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a district court decision invalidating Florida Statute 787.025, which criminalizes luring a child under twelve into a structure by persons with prior sexual offense convictions. The Court held the statute is not unconstitutionally vague or overb
• Baldwin v. Redwood City
  540 F.2d 1360· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-09 ·cited 64×
  Redwood City's ordinances limiting the aggregate area of political signs per candidate/issue, imposing permit fees and deposits, and banning signs in residential areas violate the First Amendment. However, limitations on individual sign size and aggregate area per parcel are perm
• United States v. Hines
  696 F.2d 722· 10th Cir.· 1982-11-02 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions under federal conspiracy and racketeering laws were valid, affirming the trial court's decisions on various evidentiary and procedural challenges.
• Bell v. State
  289 So. 2d 388· Fla.· 1973-12-20 ·cited 63×
  Gilbert Bell appealed his conviction for offenses involving a minor, challenging the constitutionality of Florida Statutes §§ 828.21, 800.02, and 796.07. The Florida Supreme Court upheld all three statutes as sufficiently definite and not unconstitutionally vague, and affirmed Be
• Firestone v. News-Press Publ'g Co., Inc.
  538 So. 2d 457· Fla.· 1989-02-02 ·cited 62×·via Facial Overbreadth Doctrine
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a district court decision striking down a statute prohibiting nonvoters from being within 50 feet of polling places. The Court held that while the statute is unconstitutionally overbroad as applied to the 50-foot zone outside polling rooms (whic
• Dufresne v. State
  826 So. 2d 272· Fla.· 2002-09-05 ·cited 61×·via Overbreadth Challenge
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether the term "mental injury" in the child abuse statute (section 827.03(1)(b)) is unconstitutionally vague. The Court held that the term is not vague because it is adequately defined in related statutory provisions in chapter 39, and statut
• Pallas v. State
  636 So. 2d 1358· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-05-03 ·cited 61×
  John L. Pallas appeals his conviction for aggravated stalking under Florida Statute § 784.048(3), challenging the statute as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The Third District Court of Appeal affirms, holding that the statute provides fair notice of proscribed conduct and
• Buckley v. Honorable Francis R. Valeo
  519 F.2d 821· D.C. Cir.· 1975-08-15 ·cited 60×
  The court held that certain provisions of the election statute, particularly those concerning disclosure requirements and the composition and powers of the Federal Election Commission, raise significant constitutional questions regarding the First Amendment and the separation of
• Eisner v. Stamford Bd. OF Educ.: Ursa Coleman
  440 F.2d 803· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-05 ·cited 60×
  A school board's policy requiring prior administrative approval for student distribution of written materials is unconstitutional due to a lack of procedural safeguards, specifically regarding the time for decision and the submission process.
• State v. Elder
  382 So. 2d 687· Fla.· 1980-04-03 ·cited 58×·via Facial Overbreadth Doctrine
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Fla. Stat. § 365.16(1)(b), which criminalizes anonymous telephone calls made with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass, rejecting the trial court's finding that the statute was facially overbroad under the First Ame
• Arvo W. Kannisto & the San Francisco Police Officers Ass'n v. The City & Cnty. OF SAN Francisco
  541 F.2d 841· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-31 ·cited 58×
• Moreno v. Henckel
  431 F.2d 1299· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-23 ·cited 58×
  A federal court cannot abstain from hearing a civil rights case solely because a state remedy is available; the federal remedy under Section 1983 is supplementary and does not require exhaustion of state judicial or administrative remedies.
• Muller v. Conlisk
  429 F.2d 901· 7th Cir.· 1970-06-29 ·cited 58×
  A police department rule prohibiting all derogatory comments about the department is unconstitutionally overbroad and violates officers' First Amendment free speech rights.
• State v. Barnes
  686 So. 2d 633· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-11-27 ·cited 57×
  Florida appeals a trial court's dismissal of a fleeing and eluding charge on vagueness grounds. The court reverses, holding that section 316.1935(2), which penalizes causing a law enforcement officer to engage in a high-speed vehicle pursuit, is not unconstitutionally vague as ap
• Bouters v. State
  634 So. 2d 246· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-03-25 ·cited 57×
• Cartwright v. Maynard
  822 F.2d 1477· 10th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 57×
  Reliance on an unconstitutionally vague or overbroad statutory aggravating circumstance requires vacating the death sentence, especially when the state courts do not reweigh circumstances on appeal.
• United States v. Chestnut
  533 F.2d 40· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-08 ·cited 56×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that venue was proper in New York, the indictment was sufficient, and the evidence supported the jury's finding of willfulness.
• Frank Collin & the Nat'l Socialist Party of Am. v. Smith
  578 F.2d 1197· 7th Cir.· 1978-05-22 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the Village of Skokie's ordinances prohibiting the dissemination of materials inciting hatred and prohibiting demonstrations by political parties in uniform were unconstitutional as applied to the National Socialist Party of America's planned demonstration.
• United States v. Christopher
  700 F.2d 1253· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-08 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the charging information was sufficient and the regulation constitutional, but that one defendant's conviction must be vacated due to improper arraignment in his absence.
• United States v. Hill
  500 F.2d 733· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-11 ·cited 54×·via Statutory Overbreadth
  The court held that the jury instructions, by incorporating elements of both the Roth-Memoirs and Miller obscenity standards, provided the defendant with the benefit of both tests, and that the materials were not constitutionally protected under either standard. The court also re
• State v. Sal Aiuppa
  298 So. 2d 391· Fla.· 1974-05-01 ·cited 54×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Chapter 73-120, Florida's obscenity statute, against challenges that it violated the First Amendment by being vague and not specifically defining sexual conduct under the Miller v. California standard. The court adopted Ge
• United States v. Donaciano Hernandez-Escarsega
  886 F.2d 1560· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-04 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed convictions for continuing criminal enterprise and conspiracy to travel in aid of a racketeering enterprise, but remanded for vacation of other conspiracy convictions due to impermissible cumulative punishment under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• State v. Cohen
  568 So. 2d 49· Fla.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision striking down portions of Florida's witness tampering statute (§§ 914.22(1)(a) and 914.22(3)) as unconstitutional for shifting the burden of proof to defendants and being unconstitutionally vague. The Court held that the
• State v. Walker
  444 So. 2d 1137· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-08 ·cited 52×
  Florida appealed the dismissal of charges against Carolyn Walker for violating a statute that criminalizes possession of lawfully prescribed controlled substances outside their original containers. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the statute violates substantive du
• Grand Faloon Tavern, Inc. v. Wicker
  670 F.2d 943· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 52×
  A municipal ordinance prohibiting nude and semi-nude entertainment in establishments selling alcohol is a valid exercise of police power and does not facially violate the First Amendment.
• Rhodes v. State
  283 So. 2d 351· Fla.· 1973-09-19 ·cited 52×·via Overbreadth Challenge
  James Rhodes was convicted of exhibiting obscene films at his adult theater in violation of Florida's obscenity statute. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, holding that the obscenity statute was sufficiently clear through prior judicial construction and that the a
• Record Revolution NO. 6, Inc. v. The City OF Parma
  638 F.2d 916· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the drug paraphernalia ordinances were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and reversed the district court's decision upholding them.
• Rode v. Dellarciprete
  845 F.2d 1195· 3d Cir.· 1988-04-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a sibling-in-law relationship is not constitutionally protected association under the First Amendment, thus affirming summary judgment on that claim.
• United States v. Perrin
  580 F.2d 730· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-20 ·cited 50×
  The dissenting judge believes the Travel Act does not criminalize commercial bribery without explicit statutory language.
• Schultz v. State
  361 So. 2d 416· Fla.· 1978-07-27 ·cited 50×
  Section 849.231 is constitutional and neither vague nor overbroad when construed to require that enumerated gambling items and similar devices be ordinarily or commonly used or designed for use in professional gambling operations. Defendants must be allowed to present evidence th
• Iva Nelson Gonzales v. City OF Belle Glade
  287 So. 2d 669· Fla.· 1973-12-20 ·cited 50×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed convictions of three defendants under the disorderly conduct statute (Fla.Stat. § 877.03), holding that the evidence presented—protest participation with threatening comments and complaining about restaurant service—was insufficient to constitut
• United States v. Thevis
  484 F.2d 1149· 5th Cir.· 1973-09-12 ·cited 50×
  The court held that magazines must be tested under both the Miller and Memoirs obscenity standards, with defendants receiving the benefit of the more favorable standard. The statute 18 U.S.C.A. § 1462, as judicially construed, satisfies the Miller standard's specificity requireme
• City OF Watseka v. Ill. Pub. Action Council & Am. Civil Liberties Union
  796 F.2d 1547· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-18 ·cited 49×
  The dissent argues the majority incorrectly applied the 'less-restrictive-alternative' test from overbreadth doctrine to time, place, and manner regulations, imposing too strict a scrutiny level. The dissent also asserts the majority failed to consider whether canvassers have a F
• United States v. Girard
  601 F.2d 69· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-20 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the unauthorized sale of government information constitutes a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641, and that the statute is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
• Stall v. State
  570 So. 2d 257· Fla.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Florida's obscenity statute (section 847.011) against a privacy amendment challenge, holding that the state's right to privacy does not protect the commercial sale and distribution of obscene materials, even though it prot
• Chicago Council OF Lawyers v. Bauer
  522 F.2d 242· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-04 ·cited 48×
  The court, in a dissenting opinion, argues that a "reasonable likelihood" standard, combined with "serious and imminent" factors, is constitutionally sufficient for rules governing extrajudicial comments by attorneys in criminal litigation.
• Seattle Sch. Dist. NO. 1 v. The State OF Wash.
  633 F.2d 1338· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-16 ·cited 47×
  A state statute that implicitly prohibits student assignments for racial balancing while permitting them for other reasons constitutes an impermissible racial classification under the Equal Protection Clause.
• Blannie Mae Spears v. State
  337 So. 2d 977· Fla.· 1976-09-23 ·cited 47×
  Blannie Mae Spears was convicted under Florida Statute Section 847.05 for publicly using indecent or obscene language. The Florida Supreme Court held that the statute is unconstitutional on its face as overbroad under the First Amendment because it fails to adequately distinguish
• Am. Booksellers Ass'n, Inc. v. Hudnut
  771 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 46×
  The court's majority opinion, which this concurrence partially joins, found the ordinance unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds.
• N.A.A.C.P. v. City OF Richmond
  743 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 46×
  The Ninth Circuit held that the City of Richmond's 20-day advance notice requirement for parade permits violates the First Amendment and that the waiver provision granting unfettered discretion is unconstitutional.
• United Presbyterian Church IN THE U.S.A. v. Reagan
  738 F.2d 1375· D.C. Cir.· 1984-07-17 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Executive Order No. 12333 because they failed to allege specific, concrete, or imminent injury, and a Member of Congress's claim of diminished legislative power was also a generalized grievance.
• Stansberry v. Holmes
  613 F.2d 1285· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-17 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the Harris County regulations restricting the location of sexually oriented commercial enterprises were not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad and did not violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• Boraas v. The Vill. OF Belle Terre
  476 F.2d 806· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-27 ·cited 45×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Village's zoning ordinance is a rational means to achieve legitimate zoning objectives and should be upheld.
• State v. Gaylord
  356 So. 2d 313· Fla.· 1978-03-09 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's dismissal of an aggravated child abuse charge, holding that the statutory term "maliciously" in Florida's child abuse statute provides sufficient definiteness and does not render the statute unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
• 3299 N. Fed. Hwy., Inc. v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Broward Cnty.
  646 So. 2d 215· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-09-09 ·cited 43×
  Two nude dancing nightclubs and three dancers challenged Broward County's newly adopted Adult Entertainment Code by seeking a temporary injunction to prevent its enforcement. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of the injunction, finding that app
• Chase v. Honorable Edwin A. Robson
  435 F.2d 1059· 7th Cir.· 1970-05-01 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the district court's order restricting extrajudicial statements was an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech because it lacked sufficient findings of a serious and imminent threat to the administration of justice and was overbroad.
• United States v. Reeves
  752 F.2d 995· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-28 ·cited 42×
• State v. Hamilton
  388 So. 2d 561· Fla.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 42×·via Unconstitutional Overbreadth
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's decision dismissing pollution charges against Harry Hamilton for violating Florida's Air and Water Pollution Control Act. The court held that the statute's prohibition on causing pollution that harms human health or aquatic life
• United States v. Taxe
  540 F.2d 961· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-08 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the 1971 Sound Recording Amendment is constitutional and that the jury instructions and evidentiary rulings were largely proper, though the imposition of prosecution costs on one defendant was vacated.
• Soglin v. Kauffman
  418 F.2d 163· 7th Cir.· 1969-10-24 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the University of Wisconsin's disciplinary proceedings based on the vague doctrine of "misconduct" violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments.