Newingham v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Newingham v. State

881 So. 2d 83, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 12216, 2004 WL 1856075

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 20, 2004

DocketNo. 5D03-3602

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 881 So. 2d 83 (Newingham v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Newingham v. State, 881 So. 2d 83, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 12216, 2004 WL 1856075 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.

Eddie E. Newingham appeals his designation as a sexual predator based solely upon his criminal conviction pursuant to section 775.21(4)(a)(l)(a), Florida Statutes. Newingham contends that the statute is unconstitutional because it violates the right to procedural due process. We affirm because we have held the statute constitutional. Metaxotos v. State, 876 So.2d 1261 (Fla. 4th DCA July 7, 2004); Johnson v. State, 875 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA July 2, 2004); Martin v. State, 864 So.2d 589 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Miller v. State, 861 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). As we have done previously, we certify conflict with Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THOMPSON, J.

Eddie E. Newingham appeals his designation as a sexual predator based solely upon his criminal conviction pursuant to section 775.21(4)(a)(l)(a), Florida Statutes. Newingham contends that the statute is unconstitutional because it violates the right to procedural due process. We affirm because we have held the statute constitutional. Metaxotos v. State, 876 So.2d 1261 (Fla. 4th DCA July 7, 2004); Johnson v. State, 875 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA July 2, 2004); Martin v. State, 864 So.2d 589 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Miller v. State, 861 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). As we have done previously, we certify conflict with Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

881 So. 2d 83, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 12216, 2004 WL 1856075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newingham-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack