Higgins v. State
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
656 So. 2d 483 (Higgins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.