Higgins v. State
This text of 656 So. 2d 483 (Higgins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Andrew HIGGINS, et al., Petitioners,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and Deborah K. Brueckheimer, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for petitioners.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Parker D. Thomson and Carol A. Licko, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., Miami, for respondent.
*484 SHAW, Justice.
Andrew Higgins and Ernie Bennett seek review of the district court decision reported as State v. Tremmel, 644 So.2d 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), wherein the court certified a question concerning the constitutionality of Florida's anti-stalking statute, section 784.048, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
We recently upheld the constitutionality of this statute in Bouters v. State, 20 Fla. L. Weekly S186, ___ So.2d ___ [1995 WL 242403] (Fla. Apr. 27, 1995). Accordingly, we approve Tremmel.
It is so ordered.
GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, KOGAN, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
656 So. 2d 483, 1995 WL 368414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgins-v-state-fla-1995.