State v. Strickland

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. Strickland

337 So. 2d 959

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedSeptember 23, 1976

DocketNo. 45161

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 337 So. 2d 959 (State v. Strickland) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Strickland, 337 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

Pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution, the state appeals an order of the Manatee County Circuit Court granting a motion to dismiss on the ground that Section 856.021, Florida Statutes (1975), is unconstitutionally vague. This same statute was upheld in the face of an identical challenge in State v. Ecker, 311 So.2d 104 (Fla.1975), which was then followed in Brown v. State, 314 So.2d 129 (Fla.1975), and in State v. Williams, 315 So.2d 449 (Fla.1975). There being no basis in the record or in the arguments of counsel for reconsideration of those decisions, the judgment entered below is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.

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

BY THE COURT.

Pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution, the state appeals an order of the Manatee County Circuit Court granting a motion to dismiss on the ground that Section 856.021, Florida Statutes (1975), is unconstitutionally vague. This same statute was upheld in the face of an identical challenge in State v. Ecker, 311 So.2d 104 (Fla.1975), which was then followed in Brown v. State, 314 So.2d 129 (Fla.1975), and in State v. Williams, 315 So.2d 449 (Fla.1975). There being no basis in the record or in the arguments of counsel for reconsideration of those decisions, the judgment entered below is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

337 So. 2d 959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-strickland-fla-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack