TIMOTHY BUNNELL, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether chapter 82-150, section 1 violated the state constitutional requirement that every law embrace but one subject. The Court held that the statute, which created an obstruction of justice offense, violated the one-subject provision because it was unrelated to other sections of the same chapter dealing with the Florida Council on Criminal Justice.
The statute violates the one-subject provision of the Florida Constitution because section 1, which creates an obstruction of justice offense, has no cogent relationship to sections 2 and 3, which amend and repeal provisions relating to the Florida Council on Criminal Justice. Although the title provided adequate notice of the general nature and substance of the act, the actual subject matter of section 1 is separate and disassociated from the subject matter of the other sections.
[1] A law violates the "one-subject" provision of article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution if its sections contain subject matters that bear no reasonable relations…
[2] The title of a legislative act must provide adequate notice of the general nature and substance of the act to be constitutionally sufficient.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[e]very law shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, and the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title”
The constitutional provision at issue, setting the one-subject requirement for all laws
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBunnell was charged in county court with obstruction of justice by giving false information under section 843.035. He moved to dismiss the charge, arg…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Facial Constitutional Challenge cases and more on FLexlaw
SHAW, Justice.
This petition seeks review of a district court decision, State v. Bunnell, 447 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), which expressly upheld the validity of chapter 82-150, Sec tion 1, Laws of Florida (codified as section 843.035, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982)). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Bunnell was charged in county court with obstruction of justice by giving false information in violation of section 843.035. Bunnell moved to dismiss on the ground that chapter 82-150, section 1, Laws of Florida, violated the “one-subject” provision of article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. The trial court granted the motion, finding that chapter 82-150 contained two subjects bearing no reasonable relationship to each other. On appeal, the district court reversed, holding that the statute was constitutional in that it did not violate article III, section 6. We disagree and quash the district court decision.
In pertinent part, article III, section 6 provides that “[ejvery law shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, and the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title.”
The title of chapter 82-150 reads:
An act relating to the Florida Council on Criminal Justice; creating s. 843.185, [now section 843.035] Florida Statutes, prohibiting the obstruction of justice by false information; providing a penalty; amending s. 23.152(3), (4) and (8), Florida Statutes, changing and reducing the membership of the council; providing for nonvoting representatives of members; providing for review and repeal of Part VIII of Chapter 23, Florida Statutes, relating to the “Florida Criminal Justice Council Act” in accordance with the Regulatory Sunset Act; providing an effective date.
Section 1 of the act creates section 843.185 which reads:
843.185 Obstruction by false information. — Whoever in any manner knowingly gives a false name or a false address with intent to obstruct the due execution of the law, or with the intent to intimidate, hinder, or interrupt any law enforcement officer or beverage enforcement agent in the legal performance of his duty under the construction or laws of this state, whether such obstruction is effected or not, is guilty of a misdemean-or of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.-084.
Section 2 of the act amends section 23.152, Florida Statutes (1981), relating to the Florida Council on Criminal Justice. Section 3 repeals section 23.152 and other sections relating to the Florida Council on Criminal Justice, effective 1 July 1983, subject to “sunset” review under section 11.61, Florida Statutes (1981). Section 4 provides an effective date of 1 July 1982.
The purpose of the requirement in article III, section 6 that “the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title” is to provide notice to all concerned of the general nature and substance of the act. Kirkland v. Phillips, 106 So. 2d 909 (Fla.1958). We agree with the district court that the title provides adequate notice and is not constitutionally infirm for that reason.
The subject matter of the act is another matter. We recognize the applicability of the rule that legislative acts are presumed to be constitutional and that courts should resolve every reasonable doubt in favor of constitutionality. Hanson v. State, 56 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1952). Nevertheless, it is our view that the subject of section 1 has no cogent relationship with the subject of sections 2 and 3 and that the object of section 1 is separate and disassociated from the object of sections 2 and 3. State ex rel. Landis v. Thompson, 120 Fla. 860, 163 So. 270 (1935); and Williams v. State, 100 Fla. 1054, 132 So. 186 (1930). We hold that section 1 of 82-150 was enacted in violation of the one-subject provision of article III, section 6, Florida Constitution.
The district court decision is quashed and the case remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ.,
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (29 total)
-
Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)…627] So. 2d 1122, 1124 (Fla.1981); and State v. Lee, 356 So. 2d 276, 282-83 (Fla.1978).6 In doing so, the State attempts to distinguish chapter 95-184 from the chapter laws analyzed in State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1993), and Bunnell v. State, 453 So. 2d 808 (Fla.1984), in which this Court struck down the chapter laws at issue as being violative of the single subject rule. See Johnson, 616 So. 2d at 4 (involving chapter 89-280, Laws of Florida, which addressed both habitual felony offender sentencing an…
-
State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993)…ority to repossess personal property. These two concerns have absolutely no cogent connection; nor are they reasonably related to any crisis the legislature intended to address. See Scanlan; Burch v. State, 558 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1990); Bunnell v. State, 453 So. 2d 808 (Fla.1984). No reasonable explanation exists as to why the legislature chose to join these two subjects within the same legislative act, and we find that we must reject the State’s contention that these two subjects relate to the single subject of c…1 / 2
-
Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…the court clerk to provide documents concerning an alien’s felony or misdemeanor convictions to immigration officers. The inclusion of this noncriminal provision in a criminal sentencing enactment is analogous to the situation in Bunnell v. State, 453 So. 2d 808 (Fla.1984), where the court held that legislation containing similarly unrelated provisions violated the single subject rule. The Bunnell court analyzed chapter 82-150, Laws of Florida, which created the crime of obstruction by [*550] false informat…
Previewing 3 of 29 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Uly O. Thompson, 120 Fla. 860 (Fla. 1935)
- Hanson v. State, 56 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1952)
- Kirkland v. Phillips, 106 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1958)
- Williams v. State, 100 Fla. 1054 (Fla. 1930)
- York v. Hamer, 100 Fla. 1591 (Fla. 1931)
- Saugstad v. Vicky's CAR City, Inc., 447 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- State v. Bunnell, 447 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)