State v. Acosta
664 So. 2d 967, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 645, 1995 WL 36155
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1995·No. No. 94-0055·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The trial court dismissed this case after concluding that a statutory provision under which defendant was charged was facially unconstitutional. In a companion case, State v. Marcolini, 664 So.2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) we determined that the same provision was facially constitutional. We therefore reverse this case for the reasons expressed in Marcolini.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Acosta, 664 So. 2d 967, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 645, 1995 WL 36155 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).
664 So. 2d 967 (State v. Acosta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Marcolini v. State
673 So. 2d 3 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)