S.A., A CHILD, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Dante Martin v. State, 207 So. 3d 310 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
  …defendant’s over-breadth claims, a “statute is deemed to be overbroad if it seeks to control or prevent activities properly subject to regulation by means which sweep too broadly into an area of constitutionally protected freedom.” J.L.S. v. State, 947 So. 2d 641, 644 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (citing Firestone v. News—Press Publ’g Co., Inc., 538 So. 2d 457, 459 (Fla.1989)). In J.L.S., the Third District set forth the following principles concerning the overbreadth doctrine: The doctrine of overbreadth permits an…
• Siplin v. State, 972 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
  …fail to ' adequately warn of what conduct is proscribed. Although these terms appear relatively clear, we must determine whether Mr. Siplin has standing to assert a vagueness challenge before applying the vagueness test. See, e.g., J.L.S. v. State, 947 So. 2d 641, 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). The general rule is that a defendant cannot complain of a statute’s “vagueness as applied to the hypothetical conduct of others” when “the record demonstrates that [he or she] engaged in some conduct clearly proscribed by th…
• Parkerson v. State, 163 So. 3d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
  …in the arena of free speech and expression, the over-breadth doctrine is an unusual remedy which is to be used sparingly, particularly where the challenged statute is primarily meant to regulate conduct and not merely pure speech. J.L.S. v. State, 947 So. 2d 641, 644-45 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). The defendant, as the party challenging the statutes at issue, “bears the burden of demonstrating from both the text of the statute and from actual facts that 'substantial…

Authorities Cited

• Gissendanner v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)
• Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)