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

• City OF ST. Petersburg v. Pinellas Cnty. Police Benevolent Ass'n
  414 So. 2d 293· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-05-26 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reviewed a lower court's decision that a municipal police department's "improper conduct" rule was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The appellate court reversed, finding the rule, while broad, was sufficiently clear for a police officer to understand hi
• Sovereign News Co. v. Falke
  674 F.2d 484· 6th Cir.· 1982-02-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had too narrowly construed the Ohio Supreme Court's opinion regarding the obscenity statute's constitutionality.
• McCOLLESTER v. The City OF Keene
  668 F.2d 617· 1st Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness
  A plaintiff challenging a statute must demonstrate a realistic danger of sustaining a direct injury from its operation or enforcement, and mere speculative fears are insufficient to establish a case or controversy under Article III.
• Remy Morales v. State
  407 So. 2d 230· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-11-10 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  Remy Morales was convicted of making a counterfeit Indiana operator's license in violation of Florida Statute Section 831.29. On appeal, he challenged the statute as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, and argued the evidence was insufficient due to discrepancies between his
• United States v. Calderon
  655 F.2d 1037· 10th Cir.· 1981-08-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statute prohibiting assault on a member of Congress is constitutional and that the jury instructions adequately conveyed the common-law definition of assault, which includes placing another in apprehension of bodily harm.
• Otten v. Schicker
  655 F.2d 142· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-27 ·cited 4×
  A police department regulation prohibiting employees from running for elective public office does not unconstitutionally infringe First Amendment rights, is not vague or overbroad, and does not violate equal protection.
• United States v. Goldfield Deep Mines Co. OF Nev.
  644 F.2d 1307· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-11 ·cited 4×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that Goldfield violated Forest Service regulations and was liable for trespass, and that the district court properly granted summary judgment, limited the trial to damages, and awarded relief.
• Piperato v. Zuelch
  395 So. 2d 1231· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-03-24 ·cited 4×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  Piperato, a tattoo artist, challenged Florida's tattoo licensing statute, seeking declaration that performing tattoos "under the direction" of a licensed physician need only involve periodic inspections and consultations rather than direct supervision. The court affirmed that "un
• Reeves v. McCONN
  638 F.2d 762· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Houston ordinance's prohibition of amplified obscene speech is not unconstitutionally vague, as it can be construed within the broader regulatory limits established for broadcast media.
• SAN Diego Reg'l Emp. & Training Consortium v. Marshall
  633 F.2d 862· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 4×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the petitioner lacked standing to challenge CETA's residency provisions and that the Department of Labor correctly interpreted and applied CETA regulations.
• Fla. Businessmen for Free Enter. v. State
  499 F. Supp. 346· N.D. Fla.· 1980-09-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Section 893.147(1) of Florida's 'Head Shop' law is unconstitutionally vague because it prohibits mere possession of drug paraphernalia without requiring proof of the defendant's intent or knowledge of illegal use. The remainder of the law was found constitutio
• Iron Arrow Honor Soc'y v. Hufstedler
  499 F. Supp. 496· S.D. Fla.· 1980-08-12 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The court held that the H.E.W. regulation prohibiting federal funding recipients from providing significant assistance to discriminatory organizations was a valid interpretation of Title IX and applied to the University of Miami's relationship with the male-only Iron Arrow Honor
• United States v. Werbrouck
  589 F.2d 273· 7th Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for violating federal gambling laws was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury selection.
• Yesterday's Children v. Kennedy
  569 F.2d 431· 7th Cir.· 1977-12-29 ·cited 4×·via Constitutional Vagueness
  The court held that abstention was appropriate, allowing Illinois state courts to interpret the relevant statutes and General Order regarding the release of adoption records, as this interpretation could materially alter the constitutional issues presented.
• Crossley v. State
  334 So. 2d 17· Fla.· 1976-05-28 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court affirmed a conviction for violating a statute prohibiting firearm possession by felons, finding the statute constitutional despite the defendant's argument that an exemption for those with restored civil rights was unconstitutionally vague.
• Perry v. ST. Pierre
  518 F.2d 184· 2d Cir.· 1975-05-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the City Charter section prohibiting police officers from engaging in political activity was not unconstitutional on its face and affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction.
• McKINNEY v. Parsons
  513 F.2d 264· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for violating the Birmingham obscenity ordinance was constitutional, even though the ordinance was not authoritatively construed until after his conviction, because the ordinance as construed did not violate due process or First Amen
• Squire v. Pace
  516 F.2d 240· 4th Cir.· 1975-05-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Virginia's disorderly conduct statute is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
• Hand v. State
  306 So. 2d 591· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-01-22 ·cited 4×
  Bill Hand was convicted of delivering phencyclidine under a statute prohibiting barbiturate delivery, despite prior cases holding phencyclidine was not a prohibited hallucinogenic drug. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that phencyclidine could be charged as a barbiturat
• Augenblick v. The United States
  509 F.2d 1157· Ct. Cl.· 1975-01-22 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness
  The court held that the military courts had jurisdiction to try Commander Augenblick because his offense had a "service connection," despite it occurring off-base and in civilian clothes.
• United States v. Powell
  501 F.2d 1136· 9th Cir.· 1974-08-07 ·cited 4×·via Unconstitutional Vagueness
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1715 is unconstitutionally vague as applied to firearms other than pistols and revolvers, violating the Fifth Amendment due process clause.
• Holiday Magic, Inc. v. Warren
  497 F.2d 687· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-20 ·cited 4×
  A single district judge erred by dismissing a complaint challenging a state regulation on constitutional grounds without convening a three-judge court, as the constitutional claims presented were not insubstantial.
• Myron M. Amato v. Divine
  496 F.2d 441· 7th Cir.· 1974-03-12 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the Wisconsin statute prohibiting the sale of obscene materials was unconstitutionally vague under the standards established in Miller v. California, thus requiring reversal of the conviction.
• Stout v. Dallman
  492 F.2d 992· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-22 ·cited 4×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the term 'other dangerous weapon' in Ohio's armed robbery statute is not unconstitutionally vague and provides sufficient warning of proscribed conduct.
• Pordum v. Bd. OF Regents OF the State OF NEW York
  491 F.2d 1281· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-20 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the claims challenging the constitutionality of section 305(7) of the New York Education Law were either foreclosed by prior decisions or lacked merit, and thus a three-judge court was not required.
• Reed v. Giarrusso
  462 F.2d 706· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-26 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the plaintiffs possessed the requisite standing to maintain their suit challenging the constitutionality of municipal ordinances, despite the dismissal of their original charges.
• Papish v. The Bd. OF Curators OF the Univ. OF Mo.
  464 F.2d 136· 8th Cir.· 1972-06-15 ·cited 4×
  The dissent argues that the student's dismissal for distributing allegedly obscene material violated her First Amendment rights because the material was not legally obscene and its distribution did not cause disruption.
• Holly v. United States
  464 F.2d 796· D.C. Cir.· 1972-06-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that 22 D.C. Code § 1515(a) is unconstitutionally vague because the phrase 'good account' does not provide sufficient precision for individuals to understand what conduct is prohibited.
• Sill v. The Pa. State Univ.
  462 F.2d 463· 3d Cir.· 1972-06-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the university's disciplinary regulations were not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and that the use of a special disciplinary panel did not violate procedural due process. Students placed on probation lacked standing to challenge the disciplinary proced
• United States v. St. John Tyler
  459 F.2d 647· 10th Cir.· 1972-05-17 ·cited 4×·via Constitutional Vagueness
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and properly admitted the victim's testimony, rejecting claims of unconstitutional vagueness and double jeopardy.
• State v. News-Journal Corp.
  36 Fla. Supp. 164· Volusia Cty. J. Ct.· 1972-02-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Florida Statute §104.38 is unconstitutional because it infringes upon the freedom of the press and is unconstitutionally vague.
• United States v. Kamber
  458 F.2d 918· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-19 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Challenge To Statute
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for making a false statement to the Selective Service was valid, rejecting all his grounds for appeal.
• Roni David Marciano v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  450 F.2d 1022· 8th Cir.· 1971-09-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that statutory rape, as defined by Minnesota law, constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude for deportation purposes, and the phrase 'crime involving moral turpitude' is not unconstitutionally vague.
• City OF Naples v. Miller
  243 So. 2d 608· Fla. 2d DCA· 1971-02-03 ·cited 4×
  This case reviews a city ordinance that vacated a public avenue and alleys, subject to certain conditions. The court determined that while the conditions were invalid due to vagueness, the portion of the ordinance vacating the streets was valid and severable.
• Flesch v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  240 So. 2d 504· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-11-03 ·cited 4×
  Fred Flesch challenged the constitutionality of Metropolitan Dade County's "lot clearing" ordinance after the County Manager cleared his overgrown lot and placed a lien against his property. The Florida District Court of Appeal upheld the ordinance as valid and sufficiently speci
• Fort v. Daley
  431 F.2d 1128· 7th Cir.· 1970-08-07 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the district court erred in striking plaintiffs' motions for a three-judge court and temporary restraining order solely for failure to file supporting briefs, and that dismissal issues should be decided by a three-judge court if convened.
• Budd v. Madigan
  418 F.2d 1032· 9th Cir.· 1969-11-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the California statute prohibiting being in a public place while intoxicated is not unconstitutionally vague and does not violate the Eighth Amendment for a chronic alcoholic who failed to demonstrate an irresistible compulsion to appear in public.
• Peterson v. Gaughan
  404 F.2d 1375· 1st Cir.· 1968-12-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner waived his right to challenge the admission of hearsay evidence by failing to move to strike it after conditional admission, and that the statutory definition of a sexually dangerous person and the equal protection claims lacked merit.
• Schneider v. Sweetland
  214 So. 2d 338· Fla.· 1968-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of two statutes governing chiropractic licensure. The court held that a provision allowing the Board to excuse license renewal requirements "for other good and sufficient reason" was void for vagueness, but upheld the rema
• United States ex rel. Albert Mintzer v. Dros
  403 F.2d 42· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-30 ·cited 4×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the writ of habeas corpus as the appellant's claims did not raise constitutional questions or were not cognizable in habeas corpus.
• United States ex rel. David Almeida v. Rundle
  383 F.2d 421· 3d Cir.· 1967-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that Almeida's due process rights were not violated by the indictment process, the application of law, or the denial of equal protection, and that his retrial was not barred by double jeopardy.
• Syverson v. United States
  342 F.2d 780· 8th Cir.· 1965-03-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statute was applicable to the defendant and was not unconstitutional.
• United States v. Rutherford
  332 F.2d 444· 2d Cir.· 1964-05-27 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the statute criminalizing the imparting of false information about an attempt to commit a crime is constitutional as applied to the defendant's false bomb report, and the indictment was not defective.
• Headley v. State of Fla. ex rel. Emanuel Selkowitz
  163 So. 2d 13· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-04-07 ·cited 4×
  A municipal loitering ordinance is unconstitutionally vague when it fails to define the area involved, fails to define or limit the time of day it applies, and by its broad terms subjects any citizen engaged in lawful pursuits to possible arrest merely because he cannot give a sa
• Zucker v. Vogt
  329 F.2d 426· 2d Cir.· 1964-04-01 ·cited 4×·via Constitutional Vagueness
  The court held that the plaintiff's notice was sufficient, the Dram Shop Act claim survives the decedent's death, contributory negligence is not a defense, the Act is not unconstitutionally vague, and the exclusion of a prior complaint was harmless error.
• O'Connor v. United States
  240 F.2d 404· D.C. Cir.· 1956-12-20 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness
  A conviction for contempt of Congress must be set aside if the question asked was so imprecise and ambiguous that the witness's refusal to answer cannot be considered a crime.
• Watkins v. United States
  233 F.2d 681· D.C. Cir.· 1956-04-23 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the questions asked by the Committee on Un-American Activities were pertinent to a valid legislative purpose and authorized by statute, and that the First Amendment did not protect the witness's refusal to answer.
• The United States v. Grady
  225 F.2d 410· 7th Cir.· 1955-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Commodity Exchange Act sections under which the defendant was prosecuted are constitutional and that the trial court did not err in its rulings or instructions.
• Walton v. City OF Atlanta
  181 F.2d 693· 5th Cir.· 1950-04-21 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The court held that federal jurisdiction was properly predicated on 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and that the challenged city ordinances did not deprive taxi drivers of constitutional rights, thus denying injunctive relief.
• D. W. Winkelman Co., Inc. v. Barr
  178 F.2d 341· 6th Cir.· 1949-12-14 ·cited 4×·via Vagueness and Indefiniteness
  The court held that the contract was sufficiently definite and enforceable, and that the termination clause did not render it a contract at will under Tennessee law when performance was otherwise satisfactory.