STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL SANFORD SHIRAH, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Vagueness Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
The state has appealed from a judgment holding that the “bookmaking” statute, section 849.25, Florida Statutes (1981), is unconstitutional. We reverse.
The appellant, the State of Florida, filed an information charging the appellee, Michael Sanford Shirah, with five counts of bookmaking in violation of section 849.25 and one count of violating section 895.03, Florida Statutes (1981).
The trial court held that the bookmaking statute is unconstitutional and dismissed the information.
This case is governed by this court’s holding in the case of State v. Tate, 420 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Accordingly, based upon the reasoning in Tate, we once again hold that section 849.25 does not violate the equal protection clauses of the United States and Florida Constitutions and is not so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at the statute’s meaning and differ as to its application.
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Young v. State, 638 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…consecutive minimum mandatory sentences because he used a firearm during the three offenses. This court affirmed Mr. Young’s convictions and sentences on February 11, 1983. Young v. State, 427 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); see also Young v. State, 427 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Thus, Mr. Young had the right to file a motion pursuant to rule 3.850 until sometime in the spring of 1985. Mr. Young did not file a motion pursuant to rule 3.850 within that time, although he did file an unsuccessful petition fo…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Tate, 420 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)