Vagueness Doctrine

1,231 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 996 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Staughton Lynd v. Rusk
  389 F.2d 940· D.C. Cir.· 1967-12-20 ·cited 13×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The Secretary of State may restrict the use of a passport in designated foreign areas but cannot withhold or revoke a passport solely because an applicant refuses to assure they will not travel to those areas without a passport.
• United States ex rel. Edgar I. Shott, Jr. v. Tehan
  365 F.2d 191· 6th Cir.· 1966-08-19 ·cited 13×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the Ohio Securities Act's provision shifting the burden of proof to the defendant to demonstrate an exemption is constitutional and does not violate due process, and that the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's failure to testify was not a due process viol
• Ginsberg Mach. Co., Inc. v. J. & H. Label Processing Corp.
  341 F.2d 825· 2d Cir.· 1965-02-15 ·cited 13×·via Vagueness and Indefiniteness
  The court held that the alleged oral agreement and subsequent letter did not constitute an enforceable contract because they failed to meet the requirements of the New York Statute of Frauds and lacked essential terms.
• Senger v. State
  200 So. 3d 137· Fla. 5th DCA· 2016-05-27 ·cited 12×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  Ramon David Senger was convicted of using a computer to solicit a parent for sex with a minor and traveling to meet such a minor. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction for traveling after solicitation but reversed his conviction for solicitation under
• Hughes v. State
  943 So. 2d 176· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-07-12 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge
  Christopher Hughes, a commercial airline pilot, was convicted of operating an aircraft while intoxicated or in a careless or reckless manner in violation of Florida Statutes § 860.13 after he and his copilot attempted to fly a passenger aircraft while under the influence. The Thi
• Orlando Reg'l Healthcare Sys., Inc. v. Dajuanda Alexander
  909 So. 2d 582· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-09-02 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge To Statute
  Orlando Regional Healthcare System appeals an administrative law judge's order denying NICA's exclusive remedy based on the healthcare provider's failure to provide pre-delivery notice to the patient. The court reverses on the notice issue, holding that the statutory exemption fo
• State v. Rawlins
  623 So. 2d 598· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-08-27 ·cited 12×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  Florida appealed a trial court's dismissal of boating violation charges against Rawlins, arguing that DNR rule 16N-22.012 regulating boat speeds in manatee sanctuaries is not unconstitutionally vague. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the rule provides ade
• State v. Hoyt
  609 So. 2d 744· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-07 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  Florida appealed three orders from Clay County Court that struck down Florida Statute § 370.11(3) as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The statute regulated shad fishing, including prohibiting fishing between Saturday sundown and Monday sunrise. The First District Court of
• Richards v. State
  608 So. 2d 917· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-11-17 ·cited 12×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The defendant Bryan K. Richards appeals his convictions for aggravated battery and simple battery that were enhanced under Florida Statute Section 775.085(1), a hate crime statute that reclassifies crimes if the commission "evidences prejudice based on the race, color, ancestry,
• United States v. Lancaster
  968 F.2d 1250· D.C. Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 12×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court affirmed the convictions but vacated the sentence, holding that the district court erred in aggregating drug quantities from crack house offenses under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(2) for sentencing on the distribution charge.
• United States v. Johnson
  952 F.2d 565· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-19 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that the FISA surveillance was lawful, the prosecution's opening statement and admitted evidence were not unfairly prejudicial, and the indictment and evidence for Count Three were sufficient. The court also rejected the F
• Ferris Alexander v. Thornburgh
  943 F.2d 825· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions for conspiracy, selling obscene materials, and RICO violations, as well as the forfeiture of assets, finding no reversible error in the jury's verdicts, the application of statutes, or constitutional challenges.
• Ismail Abdul Hakim Akbar v. State
  570 So. 2d 1047· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-11-27 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge To Statute
  Ismail Abdul Hakim Akbar challenged his habitual felony offender sentence for two cocaine sales convictions, arguing that the trial judge improperly admitted evidence of facts for which he was not charged and that the habitual offender statute was unconstitutionally vague. The ap
• United States v. Carlton Reed
  897 F.2d 351· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-28 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the sentence, holding that prior precedent regarding the "100 to 1 ratio" in the Sentencing Guidelines drug quantity table was dispositive of the defendant's equal protection claim.
• State v. Freund
  561 So. 2d 305· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-02-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a county court ruling declaring a state statute unconstitutional, and that the statute prohibiting possession of alcohol by persons under 21 is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad as applied to t
• Opdyke Inv. Co. v. City OF Detroit
  883 F.2d 1265· 6th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in applying the Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984 retroactively, finding it inequitable not to do so given the circumstances, and that the city's actions were not subject to antitrust liability.
• Miller v. Dugger
  858 F.2d 1536· 11th Cir.· 1988-11-01 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise claims that lacked merit, and therefore, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should be denied.
• Robert Doyle, M.D. v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  848 F.2d 296· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a doctor must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial review of a Medicare sanction, and that the statute and procedures used were constitutional.
• Carlin Commc'ns, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & The United States
  837 F.2d 546· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the FCC's regulations establishing defenses to prosecution under section 223(b) for dial-a-porn services, including access codes and scrambling, are a feasible and effective method for restricting minors' access to obscene telephone messages without unreasonab
• Jai K. Varandani v. Bowen
  824 F.2d 307· 4th Cir.· 1987-07-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a physician is not entitled to a formal, pre-suspension evidentiary hearing before being suspended from Medicare reimbursement, and the statute and regulations are not unconstitutionally vague.
• Planned Parenthood Ass'n OF Cincinnati, Inc. v. The City OF Cincinnati & Stanley Broadnax, M.D.
  822 F.2d 1390· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the ordinance's specific disposal requirements for fetal remains unconstitutionally burden the right to abortion.
• J.H. Pritchard v. JAX Liquors, Inc.
  499 So. 2d 926· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-12-24 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness
  Pritchard appealed the dismissal of his negligence action against Jax Liquors under Florida's dram shop statute (§ 768.125). The court reversed, holding that the civil statute does not incorporate the written notice requirement from the separate criminal statute (§ 562.50) and th
• L.L.N. v. State
  504 So. 2d 6· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-12-23 ·cited 12×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
• United States v. DeCASTRIS
  798 F.2d 261· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that evidence of prior lies was admissible to show intent in a mail fraud prosecution, even if it risked prejudice.
• Gates & FOX Co., Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & William E. Brock
  790 F.2d 154· D.C. Cir.· 1986-05-13 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The court held that the regulation failed to provide constitutionally adequate notice that self-rescuers were required in areas not near an advancing face, thus the citation for violation was improper.
• Adamson v. Ricketts
  758 F.2d 441· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-18 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge
  The court held that the admission of certain hearsay statements was a Confrontation Clause violation but harmless error, and that Arizona's death penalty statute is constitutional as applied.
• Watson v. City OF Newark
  746 F.2d 1008· 3d Cir.· 1984-10-31 ·cited 12×
  The appeal is dismissed for lack of standing because the appellants received all the relief they sought and were not aggrieved by the district court's order.
• United States v. Vigil
  743 F.2d 751· 10th Cir.· 1984-09-10 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence for the necessity defense and that the designation as a Dangerous Special Offender was constitutional.
• Vance Murphy v. The Honorable Scott Matheson
  742 F.2d 564· 10th Cir.· 1984-08-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Utah Drug Paraphernalia Act is not unconstitutionally overbroad as applied to commercial speech and that its vagueness challenge fails due to a scienter requirement and clear statutory factors. However, certain enforcement factors may be unconstitutionally
• Wilhelm Bertens v. Stewart
  453 So. 2d 92· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-06-20 ·cited 12×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a school suspension and alternative program placement of a fifth-grader for bringing vitamin pills to school, holding that the school board's rule prohibiting possession of "medicine" was unconstitutionally vague because it failed to define "med
• Pa. Power & Light Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & Raymond J. Donovan
  737 F.2d 350· 3d Cir.· 1984-06-15 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The court held that while an employee violated the grounding regulation, the employer could not be cited for a serious violation because the record lacked substantial evidence that the employer failed to exercise reasonable diligence to discover and prevent the employee's unfores
• Adams v. Gunnell
  729 F.2d 362· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 12×
  Discipline imposed for signing a prison petition did not violate the First Amendment, but the lack of clear notice that such conduct was prohibited violated due process. The issue of qualified immunity was not properly preserved and requires further determination.
• Nova Records, Inc. v. Sendak
  706 F.2d 782· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Indiana's drug paraphernalia statute is not unconstitutionally vague or violative of the First Amendment, applying the standards for facial challenges.
• Camille Corp. v. Phares
  705 F.2d 223· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-13 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness
  The court held that the East Moline drug paraphernalia ordinance is constitutional, rejecting claims of First Amendment, Equal Protection, Commerce Clause, and Due Process violations.
• CLR Corp. v. Lowell Henline
  702 F.2d 637· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-23 ·cited 12×
• United States v. Bengston
  702 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge
  The court held that the indictment was constitutionally sufficient but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether the attorney's motion to withdraw due to a conflict of interest was dilatory.
• Kan. Retail Trade Coop. v. Stephan
  695 F.2d 1343· 10th Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness
  The court held that the Kansas drug paraphernalia statute, H.B. 2020, is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, particularly due to its intent requirements, and that the overbreadth doctrine does not apply to commercial speech challenges to the advertising section.
• Postscript Enters., Inc. v. Whaley
  658 F.2d 1249· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the St. Louis ordinance restricting the sale of contraceptives and sex-inciting devices is unconstitutional, violating the right to privacy and due process through vagueness.
• United States v. Howard
  654 F.2d 522· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-24 ·cited 12×·via Vagueness Challenge To Statute
  The Assimilative Crimes Act allows prosecution for escape from state custody on a federal reservation when no federal statute specifically covers such an escape.
• United States v. Felsen
  648 F.2d 681· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or in its rulings on the other issues raised.
• Garden State BAR Ass'n & the N.J. Ass'n of Black Women Lawyers v. Middlesex Cnty. Ethics Comm.
  643 F.2d 119· 3d Cir.· 1981-02-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from interfering with state attorney disciplinary proceedings under Younger v. Harris, as these proceedings are judicial in nature and offer an adequate forum for constitutional claims.
• Jeffry G. Pearl v. Fla. Bd. OF Real Est.
  394 So. 2d 189· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-02-17 ·cited 12×
  A licensed real estate salesman's license was suspended for 60 days by the Florida Board of Real Estate based on convictions for possession of controlled substances under a statute allowing suspension for crimes involving moral turpitude. The Third District Court of Appeal revers
• The Flipside v. Vill. OF Hoffman Ests.
  639 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide clear notice of what items are regulated, violating the due process clause.
• Bread Political Action Comm. v. The Fed. Election Comm'n
  635 F.2d 621· 7th Cir.· 1980-12-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that 2 U.S.C. § 441b(b)(4)(D) does not impermissibly infringe plaintiffs' First Amendment right of assembly or violate the Fifth Amendment's due process clause, nor is the term 'solicitation' unconstitutionally vague.
• BIG Mama RAG, Inc. v. United States
  631 F.2d 1030· D.C. Cir.· 1980-09-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Treasury regulation's definition of 'educational' for tax-exempt status is unconstitutionally vague due to its 'full and fair exposition' standard, violating the First Amendment.
• Davis v. Williams
  617 F.2d 1100· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a municipal ordinance prohibiting conduct "prejudicial to good order" was facially overbroad and vague, violating the First Amendment rights of municipal employees.
• Harry v. Jump
  619 F.2d 11· 8th Cir.· 1980-04-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Ohio preferential payment statute was not unconstitutionally vague and that the payments made to the law firm were voidable preferences under Ohio law.
• State v. Riker
  376 So. 2d 862· Fla.· 1979-11-01 ·cited 12×
  Florida's Supreme Court reversed a trial court's decision that invalidated the child abuse statute as unconstitutionally vague. The Court held that the statutory language regarding deprivation of necessities and infliction of physical or mental injury provides sufficient notice o
• State v. Cormier
  375 So. 2d 852· Fla.· 1979-09-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Florida Statutes sections 810.09(1) and 810.011(6) provide constitutionally sufficient warning that criminal trespass can be committed on a privately-owned island surrounded by water, even if not posted, fenced, or cultivated.
• Goldberg v. Simoni
  601 F.2d 653· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-28 ·cited 12×·via Constitutional Vagueness
  The court held that the district court's abstention order, which stayed proceedings pending state court determination of state law issues, is appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) as a denial of a temporary injunction.