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

• United States v. Martinez
  507 F.2d 58· 10th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the border patrol officer's actions in stopping the vehicle and observing the marijuana did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and the statute under which the defendant was charged is constitutional.
• Hutchin v. State
  290 So. 2d 35· Fla.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 2×
  Appellant Hutchin was charged under Florida's riot statute for allegedly inciting a riot by shouting an obscenity and refusing to enter a police car. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the information failed to allege sufficient facts to support a riot charge, as me
• Peter Cummings, M.D. v. Hampton
  485 F.2d 1153· 9th Cir.· 1973-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge believes the government has a legitimate purpose to inquire about Communist Party membership for certain positions, distinguishing it from broader associational inquiries.
• United States v. An Article OF Drug consisting
  484 F.2d 748· 7th Cir.· 1973-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 'current good manufacturing practice' provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is not unconstitutionally vague and provides adequate notice of prohibited conduct.
• Town of Lantana v. Pelczynski
  39 Fla. Supp. 76· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1973-07-19 ·cited 2×
  A Florida circuit court reversed a conviction for violating a Lantana municipal ordinance prohibiting publication of political attacks on candidates within seven days of an election, holding the ordinance unconstitutional under the First Amendment and Florida Constitution as an i
• Banderas-Aguirre v. United States
  474 F.2d 985· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal prisoner's motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was properly denied based on the existing record.
• The City OF Daytona Beach v. Icelene Brown
  273 So. 2d 124· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-02-08 ·cited 2×
  The City of Daytona Beach appealed the Circuit Court's reversal of disorderly conduct and unlawful assembly convictions, arguing the ordinances were constitutional. The appellate court reversed, holding that the ordinances were not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad on their f
• Van v. Robinson
  472 F.2d 839· 9th Cir.· 1973-01-03 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The court held that the Postal Service employee's termination for failure to meet financial obligations was lawful, even after filing a Wage Earners' Plan, as the plan did not supersede agency regulations or prohibit such termination.
• Tornillo v. Miami Herald Publ'g Co.
  38 Fla. Supp. 80· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1972-10-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Florida Statute §104.38 is unconstitutional on its face as it violates the First Amendment by impermissibly infringing upon freedom of the press and is also void for vagueness.
• United States v. Moises Cantu
  501 F.2d 1019· 7th Cir.· 1972-10-06 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress identification evidence, that the jury instructions were adequate, and that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague.
• Hopson v. Asch
  457 F.2d 79· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-14 ·cited 2×
  Federal courts should not enjoin or grant declaratory relief for pending state court proceedings unless exceptional circumstances are present.
• Pennsylvania ex rel. Judith Rothenberg (Beers) v. Beers
  450 F.2d 783· 3d Cir.· 1971-11-03 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  Removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1) is improper when the alleged denial of rights is not based on racial equality.
• Musick v. Jonsson
  449 F.2d 201· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the irreparable injury required for federal injunctive relief against the ordinance.
• Williams v. Lou Brewer
  442 F.2d 657· 8th Cir.· 1971-05-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition was properly dismissed because the Iowa Supreme Court's interpretation of the statute was binding, and the petitioner's constitutional claims were without merit.
• United States ex rel. Albert A. Raby v. Woods
  440 F.2d 478· 7th Cir.· 1971-03-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Raby's conduct constituted resisting arrest under Illinois law, and his conviction did not violate double jeopardy principles despite a prior municipal conviction for obstructing traffic.
• Edsel Heinlein and Clara Heinlein v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  239 So. 2d 635· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-10-06 ·cited 2×
  A Metropolitan Court Judge has the authority to issue search warrants under the county code, and the code provisions do not unconstitutionally impair contractual obligations or are not unconstitutionally vague.
• Blank v. United States
  400 F.2d 302· 5th Cir.· 1968-09-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that citrated whole blood and packed red blood cells are not "analogous products" to therapeutic serum under 42 U.S.C.A. § 262(b), and affirmed a conviction for introducing a misbranded drug into interstate commerce.
• S. Ry. Co. v. Mrs. Opal Shealey
  382 F.2d 752· 5th Cir.· 1967-08-09 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the jury charges were substantially covered, evidence of train speed at a prior location was admissible, and the verdict was valid even if based on either a public or private road theory.
• Sterbenz v. City of Miami
  28 Fla. Supp. 4· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1966-12-13 ·cited 2×
  Sterbenz, a Miami city employee, sought a declaratory judgment that provisions of Miami's charter and civil service rules prohibiting public employees from engaging in political activities violated the First Amendment. The court granted summary judgment for Sterbenz, holding that
• Delaney v. State
  190 So. 2d 578· Fla.· 1966-09-28 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a probation order (without adjudication of guilt) imposed on Delaney following his jury conviction for attempting to commit sodomy in violation of F.S. § 800.01. The court held that such a probation order is a final appealable order and that the
• United States v. Pellegrino Millo
  354 F.2d 224· 2d Cir.· 1965-12-15 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the wagering tax statutes do not violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and were not void for vagueness, and that there was sufficient evidence of wilfulness and engagement in the wagering business.
• Yavitch v. Seewack
  323 F.2d 561· 9th Cir.· 1963-10-09 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness and Indefiniteness
  The court held that the trial court improperly considered issues and made findings regarding patents not properly before it, and that findings on the patents in issue lacked sufficient detail.
• United States v. Foster
  309 F.2d 8· 4th Cir.· 1962-10-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of evidence showing the defendant's resistance to lawful IRS investigations and his communication to his attorney was prejudicial error, requiring reversal.
• United States v. N.C. Granite Corp.
  288 F.2d 232· 4th Cir.· 1961-03-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the actual value of goods for tariff purposes is the manufacturer's selling price less freight charges, not the manufacturing cost.
• Tillman Foster Etherton v. United States
  249 F.2d 410· 9th Cir.· 1957-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's post-conviction motions were untimely and that the statute under which he was convicted was not unconstitutionally vague.
• Anderson & Brown Co. v. Anderson
  161 F.2d 974· 7th Cir.· 1947-05-23 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness and Indefiniteness
  A contract is unenforceable for vagueness and indefiniteness if essential elements, such as price, are not ascertainable with reasonable certainty.
• Fla. Fruit & Produce, Inc. v. United States
  117 F.2d 506· 5th Cir.· 1941-02-13 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act is constitutional and that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding the evidence or the statute's application.
• State v. Karel
  100 Fla. 388· Fla.· 1930-07-30 ·cited 2×
  This case involved a challenge to a Florida statute criminalizing fraud by misrepresenting the ability to obtain secret or inside information. The court upheld the statute, finding it sufficiently defined the criminal act and did not violate the Bill of Rights.
• Isom Wilson v. State
  78 Fla. 41· Fla.· 1919-06-26 ·cited 2×·via Vagueness
  This case addresses whether an indictment is invalid if it omits the name of the county where the grand jury convened. The court held that such an omission is not fatal, especially when the indictment otherwise specifies the county and a statute exists to cure minor defects.
• United States v. Ostrander
  114 F.4th 1348· 11th Cir.· 2024-09-05 ·cited 1×
  Matthew Ostrander, arrested in Florida for failure to register as a sex offender, was convicted of knowingly possessing 480 computer-generated images of children in sexually explicit conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(1). The Eleventh Circuit affirmed his conviction, re
• Parris v. State
  359 So. 3d 1178· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-04-12 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness Challenge To Statute
  The Sunshine Law does not violate due process by failing to define "reasonable notice" and "open to the public" because these terms receive ample guidance from case law and plain meaning, and Parris's participation in an unannounced meeting without public notice constituted a kno
• State v. Petagine
  290 So. 3d 1106· Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-01-02 ·cited 1×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal of a felony hazing charge against Anthony Petagine, finding the State sufficiently alleged a prima facie case. The court affirmed the denial of Petagine's motion to dismiss a misdemeanor hazing count, finding no prejudice f
• State v. Tosha Jo Robbins
  247 So. 3d 666· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-05-23 ·cited 1×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  A vagueness challenge to a criminal statute that does not implicate First Amendment freedoms must be examined in light of the facts of the case at hand, and a trial court cannot dismiss charges based on an abstract constitutional analysis without taking evidence or making factual
• United States v. Matchett
  837 F.3d 1118· 11th Cir.· 2016-09-13 ·cited 1×
  The dissent argues that the Eleventh Circuit panel's decision in United States v. Matchett, which held that the vagueness doctrine does not apply to the Sentencing Guidelines, is incorrect and contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The dissent contends that the identical language i
• Figueroa-Santiago v. State
  116 So. 3d 585· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-06-26 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness Challenge
  Figueroa-Santiago challenged the facial constitutionality of a Florida statute criminalizing the use of electronic communications to further gang interests. The court found only the statute's 'advertising presence' prong unconstitutionally overbroad, but upheld the 'intimidation
• City OF W. Palm Beach v. Terance Emmanuel Chatman
  112 So. 3d 723· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-05-08 ·cited 1×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court's finding that West Palm Beach's ordinance criminalizing loitering with intent to commit prostitution is facially unconstitutional. The court held the ordinance unconstitutionally overbroad and vague because it allows pol
• United States v. Fedida
  1991 WL 45339· M.D. Fla.· 2013-05-01 ·cited 1×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The Court held that the Controlled Substance Analogue Enforcement Act of 1986 is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to UR-144 and XLR-11, and the indictment is sufficient on its face.
• Schmidter v. State
  103 So. 3d 263· Fla. 5th DCA· 2012-12-21 ·cited 1×
  Mark Schmidter and Julian Heicklen appealed convictions for indirect criminal contempt arising from distributing FIJA pamphlets about jury nullification at a courthouse complex. The court reversed Heicklen's convictions due to failure to conduct a Faretta inquiry for self-represe
• Harrell v. Florida Bar
  490 F. Supp. 2d 381· M.D. Fla.· 2011-09-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Florida Bar Rules prohibiting "quality of legal services" statements and "promises results" are not unconstitutionally vague, as they provide sufficient notice and enforcement standards for lawyers of ordinary intelligence.
• Nat'l Org. for Marriage v. Roberts
  753 F. Supp. 2d 1217· N.D. Fla.· 2010-11-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on its constitutional challenges to Florida's electioneering communications statutes, and therefore denied the motion for a preliminary injunction.
• United States v. Aey, Inc.
  603 F. Supp. 2d 1363· S.D. Fla.· 2009-03-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the superseding indictment sufficiently alleged fraud and that the DFARS rule was properly promulgated and not unconstitutionally vague, thus denying the motions to dismiss.
• Turner v. Creative Hospitality Ventures, Inc.
  588 F. Supp. 2d 1347· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-02 ·cited 1×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA) does not violate due process and denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court also granted extensions for discovery and mediation.
• US Fid. & Guar. v. Liberty Surplus Ins.
  485 F. Supp. 2d 1326· M.D. Fla.· 2007-05-02 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness
  US Fidelity & Guaranty, as surety for a general contractor, sued two insurers to recover settlement payments made on construction claims. The excess carrier Liberty Surplus then sued other insurers for contribution and subrogation. The court denied One Beacon's motion to dismiss
• VFW John O'Connor Post 4833 v. Santa Rosa Cnty.
  506 F. Supp. 2d 1079· N.D. Fla.· 2007-03-12 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Santa Rosa County Land Development Code § 7.01.13(E)'s waiver provision is facially unconstitutional for vagueness but is severable from the rest of the ordinance, which remains valid.
• Cloyd v. State
  943 So. 2d 149· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-07-12 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness Challenge
  Thomas Porter Cloyd, a copilot, was convicted of operating an aircraft while intoxicated in violation of Florida Statute § 860.13. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, rejecting preemption challenges, constitutional vagueness and delegation arguments, and evidentiary obje
• Womancare of Orlando, Inc. v. Agwunobi
  448 F. Supp. 2d 1293· N.D. Fla.· 2005-07-18 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding they were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their facial challenge to the Parental Notice of Abortion Act.
• Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. Pinellas Cnty.
  321 F. Supp. 2d 1275· M.D. Fla.· 2004-05-19 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the prior litigation did not preclude the current claims and that the charities' allegations regarding the ordinance's prior restraint on speech were sufficient to proceed.
• Alexis, Inc. v. Pinellas Cnty.
  194 F. Supp. 2d 1336· M.D. Fla.· 2002-03-29 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness
  The court held that corporate plaintiffs have standing to sue under § 1983, Florida Statute § 847.09 does not preempt county ordinances regulating adult uses, and warrantless arrests of dancers for ordinance violations do not constitute an unconstitutional prior restraint or hara
• Noble v. State
  787 So. 2d 808· Fla.· 2001-05-24 ·cited 1×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that there is no constitutional right to plea bargain and approved the district court's decision consistent with prior rulings on the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act.
• State v. Glover
  776 So. 2d 1129· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-02-14 ·cited 1×·via Vagueness