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

• Hoffman v. Carson
  250 So. 2d 891· Fla.· 1971-07-07 ·cited 37×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 800.03, prohibiting indecent exposure, is constitutional both on its face and as applied to appellant's performance, distinguishing conduct from protected speech.
• United States v. Hiland
  909 F.2d 1114· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-19 ·cited 36×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and FDCA violations, but vacated a portion of Carter-Glogau's sentence regarding prosecution costs.
• United States v. Fleet Wallace Maull
  806 F.2d 1340· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-02 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that concurrent sentences for conspiracy and Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) charges constitute impermissible double punishment, requiring vacation of the conspiracy conviction. Other convictions were affirmed.
• Hameetman v. The City OF Chicago
  776 F.2d 636· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-30 ·cited 36×
• Levine v. United States Dist. Court FOR the Cent. Dist. OF Cal.
  764 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness
  The court held that attorneys' speech can be restrained by gag orders to prevent the risk of eliminating a fair trial before an impartial jury.
• United States v. Schell
  692 F.2d 672· 10th Cir.· 1982-10-13 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the trial court's findings and sentencing under the dangerous special offender statute did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights, including due process and the Eighth Amendment.
• High OL' Times, Inc. v. Busbee
  673 F.2d 1225· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-23 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Georgia drug paraphernalia statutes were not unconstitutionally vague on their face because they provided adequate notice and could be constitutionally applied to certain items sold by the appellees. The possibility of arbitrary enforcement did not render
• Beckerman v. City OF Tupelo
  664 F.2d 502· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-23 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the parade ordinance's prohibition on parades starting after 6:00 p.m. and the sound-truck ordinance's definition of residential areas were invalid.
• Solimena v. State
  402 So. 2d 1240· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-08-04 ·cited 36×
  Three horse trainers appealed orders revoking or suspending their licenses under Florida's 'absolute insurer rule,' which held them strictly liable for racing horses with prohibited drugs regardless of knowledge or participation. The court affirmed, upholding the rule as a valid
• Reeves v. McCONN
  631 F.2d 377· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-24 ·cited 36×
  The court held that while the city can regulate sound amplification, certain provisions of its ordinance were unconstitutionally overbroad or vague, infringing on First Amendment rights.
• Int'l Soc'y FOR Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Rochford
  585 F.2d 263· 7th Cir.· 1978-10-06 ·cited 36×
  The court held that certain airport regulations were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, infringing on First Amendment rights, while others were permissible.
• Gasparinetti v. Kerr
  568 F.2d 311· 3d Cir.· 1977-11-03 ·cited 36×
  The court held that two police department regulations prohibiting derogatory references and censoring official transactions were unconstitutionally overbroad. It also found a third regulation prohibiting public disparagement to be unconstitutionally overbroad. The court reversed
• United States v. Houston
  547 F.2d 104· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-13 ·cited 36×
  A prior state conviction constitutes a felony for federal firearm possession purposes if the maximum punishment for that offense exceeds one year, regardless of the sentence actually imposed or the state's classification of the offense.
• United States v. Largent
  545 F.2d 1039· 6th Cir.· 1976-12-13 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness
  The court held that the defendants' Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights were not violated, the statutes under which they were convicted are constitutional, and the admission of prior similar acts evidence was proper.
• Meyers v. Alldredge
  492 F.2d 296· 3d Cir.· 1974-02-14 ·cited 36×
  The court held that while due process applies to prison disciplinary hearings involving good time forfeiture, the presence of an official with substantial personal involvement in the underlying events on the disciplinary committee violates the right to an impartial tribunal. Howe
• Bradshaw v. State
  286 So. 2d 4· Fla.· 1973-11-21 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness
  Florida Supreme Court affirmed Bradshaw's conviction for disorderly conduct, resisting an officer, and assault and battery, rejecting his challenge that the disorderly conduct statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The court held the statute met constitutional standa
• United States v. Baranski
  484 F.2d 556· 7th Cir.· 1973-08-29 ·cited 36×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the defendants had standing to challenge their conspiracy conviction based on the unconstitutionality of one alleged object of the conspiracy, and that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
• Thoms v. Heffernan
  473 F.2d 478· 2d Cir.· 1973-01-08 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness
  The dissenting judge believes the court lacks appellate jurisdiction because the three-judge district court failed to properly address injunctive relief, and thus the case should be remanded.
• NEW York State Waterways Ass'n, Inc. v. Diamond
  469 F.2d 419· 2d Cir.· 1972-11-10 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for lack of jurisdiction and in denying a three-judge court, as the constitutional claims were not insubstantial.
• United States v. Ross
  458 F.2d 1144· 5th Cir.· 1972-04-05 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a Molotov cocktail is a 'destructive device' under the National Firearms Act and that the statute is constitutional and supported by sufficient evidence.
• Joyce v. United States
  454 F.2d 971· D.C. Cir.· 1971-10-26 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Flag Desecration Statute is not unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, or an abridgment of First Amendment rights, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for publicly mutilating the flag.
• Jackson v. Dorrier
  424 F.2d 213· 6th Cir.· 1970-04-06 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a high school's hair length regulation, reasonably connected to maintaining school discipline and a wholesome academic environment, does not violate students' constitutional rights when applied with adequate due process.
• Contreras v. United States
  213 F.2d 96· 5th Cir.· 1954-05-11 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the information was sufficient and the penalty provisions were not unconstitutionally vague, affirming the conviction.
• Burns v. Town of Palm Beach
  999 F.3d 1317· 11th Cir.· 2021-06-08 ·cited 35×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  Donald Burns challenged his local architectural review commission's denial of his building permit to demolish and replace his beachfront mansion with a larger midcentury modern design, arguing the commission's criteria violated his First Amendment free speech rights and his Fourt
• Rice v. State
  754 So. 2d 881· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-04-14 ·cited 35×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that Florida Statute § 893.13(1)(e), which enhances penalties for drug offenses near places of worship, does not violate the establishment clause, is not void for vagueness, and does not violate due process or equal protection rights.
• United States v. Jude R. Hayes
  794 F.2d 1348· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-09 ·cited 35×
  The dissenting judge holds that the search warrants were unconstitutionally broad and violated the Fourth Amendment's particularity requirement.
• United States v. Maurice W. Rosenberg, M.D.
  515 F.2d 190· 9th Cir.· 1975-03-31 ·cited 35×
  A doctor acting outside the usual course of professional practice is not a "practitioner" under the Controlled Substances Act and is therefore subject to its criminal provisions, including 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
• In re Fuller
  255 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1971-11-10 ·cited 35×
  A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for disorderly conduct under Florida Statutes Section 877.03 after a minor altercation at school over a torn Negro History Week poster. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that while the disorderly conduct statute is no
• Procio Rivero Pilapil v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  424 F.2d 6· 10th Cir.· 1970-03-20 ·cited 35×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that it is not precluded from considering constitutional issues raised by an alien in a petition for review, even if not explicitly raised in the administrative record, and that a nonimmigrant student does not have a constitutional right to work without authorizati
• State v. Catalano
  104 So. 3d 1069· Fla.· 2012-12-13 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness Challenge
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Second District Court of Appeal's declaration that Fla. Stat. § 316.3045, which prohibits amplified sound from vehicles that is "plainly audible" beyond 25 feet, is unconstitutional. The statute violates the First Amendment by creating a con
• Johnson v. State
  44 So. 3d 198· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-09-15 ·cited 34×·via Unconstitutional Vagueness
  The court held that the appellant's post-conviction petition and subsequent appeal were frivolous, abusive, and not brought in good faith, warranting referral for disciplinary procedures.
• Simmons v. State
  944 So. 2d 317· Fla.· 2006-11-16 ·cited 34×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld two statutes criminalizing online conduct directed at minors: a luring statute (§ 847.0135) and a transmission statute (§ 847.0138) prohibiting sending harmful material to minors via electronic mail. The court rejected facial constitutional challe
• United States v. House
  939 F.2d 659· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 34×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the defendant's incriminating statements were properly admitted, evidence of prior criminal conduct was admissible, the jury instructions were appropriate, and the sentence for possession of cocaine base was constitutional.
• United States v. Davenport
  929 F.2d 1169· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-09 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  The court held that the act of structuring a transaction to evade reporting requirements constitutes a single offense, not multiple offenses for each individual deposit. It also held that statements made to investigators after waiving the right to remain silent are admissible.
• United States v. Gomer
  764 F.2d 1221· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-11 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority erred in finding plain error regarding the district court's failure to consider the defendant's dependents' needs, as the defendant waived the issue by not raising it below.
• Levas AND Levas v. Vill. OF Antioch
  684 F.2d 446· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 34×
  This document is an ordinance, not a court opinion with a holding.
• Knapp v. Cardwell
  667 F.2d 1253· 9th Cir.· 1982-01-19 ·cited 34×
  The court held that findings of non-existence of certain aggravating circumstances at an initial sentencing hearing, if based on evidence similar to that supporting a conviction, function as acquittals for double jeopardy purposes and cannot be revisited on resentencing.
• Downing v. Williams
  624 F.2d 612· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-21 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness Of Regulations
  The dissenting judge argues the majority erred by disregarding the jury's findings of fact, which were supported by substantial evidence, and by independently re-examining the record on issues of procedural due process and First Amendment rights.
• High OL' Times, Inc. v. Busbee
  621 F.2d 135· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by abstaining from hearing the constitutional challenges to the Georgia drug paraphernalia statutes, as the Pullman factors for abstention were not met.
• Savina Home Indus., Inc. v. Sec'y OF Labor & Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n
  594 F.2d 1358· 10th Cir.· 1979-03-23 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the exclusionary rule is not retroactively applicable to pre-Barlow's OSHA inspections where the inspecting officer could not have known the search was unconstitutional, and that Savina's due process and Sixth Amendment claims lacked merit or standing.
• S.H.B. v. State
  355 So. 2d 1176· Fla.· 1977-11-30 ·cited 34×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a juvenile's adjudication for violating Section 871.01, which prohibits willful disturbance of school assemblies and religious gatherings. The court rejected First Amendment overbreadth challenges, holding that the statute is constitutional and ca
• LEE v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.
  552 F.2d 447· 2d Cir.· 1977-03-15 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness and Indefiniteness
  The court held that the parol evidence rule did not bar proof of the oral agreement and that the agreement was not too vague to be enforceable, affirming the jury's verdict.
• Napier v. Sister Mary Gertrude
  542 F.2d 825· 10th Cir.· 1976-10-12 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the case was moot because the appellant had been released from custody and the issue was not capable of repetition yet evading review, nor was it a certified class action.
• Wiegand v. Honorable William H. Seaver
  504 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-14 ·cited 34×
  Florida's breach of the peace and disorderly conduct statute (F.S. 877.03) is unconstitutionally overbroad because it fails to distinguish between protected and unprotected speech and has not been authoritatively construed to limit its application solely to unprotected expression
• Eugenio Herberto Rojas v. State
  288 So. 2d 234· Fla.· 1973-12-05 ·cited 34×·via Vagueness Of Statutes
  Eugenio Rojas appealed his conviction on direct appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, challenging the constitutionality of jury selection procedures and a state statute governing grand jury pool selection. The court accepted jurisdiction only over the statutory validity issue and
• Levy v. Parker
  478 F.2d 772· 3d Cir.· 1973-04-18 ·cited 34×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the joinder of unconstitutional charges with a valid charge did not substantially prejudice the defendant's right to a fair trial on the valid charge, nor did it rebut the presumption of validity for the general sentence.
• United States v. Floyd
  477 F.2d 217· 10th Cir.· 1973-04-13 ·cited 34×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court held that the appellants were properly convicted under 18 U.S.C.A. § 1382 for entering a military reservation without permission, as the regulation was valid and they had notice.
• United States v. Levine
  457 F.2d 1186· 10th Cir.· 1972-02-22 ·cited 34×·via Constitutional Vagueness
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1952 by alleging defendants 'caused' interstate travel, and that voluntary guilty pleas waived non-jurisdictional defects.
• Hines v. Baker
  422 F.2d 1002· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-17 ·cited 34×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional infringement regarding the waiver of appeal, the constitutionality of the felony murder statute, or the denial of a transcript for exploratory purposes.
• United States v. Roth
  237 F.2d 796· 2d Cir.· 1956-09-18 ·cited 34×·via Void For Vagueness Doctrine