SMITH ET AL.
v.
FLORIDA
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 Court vacated and remanded the judgment for reconsideration in light of a prior decision.
Defendants were charged under Florida's vagrancy statute for wandering without lawful purpose. They were convicted after a bench trial, and the Florid…
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 Void For Vagueness Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
Mr. Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court.
Florida’s vagrancy statute1 includes in the term “vagrants,” who can be criminally charged and convicted, “persons wandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object.”2 The defendants were so charged and pleaded not guilty, waived trial by jury, and were tried by a judge, who denied a motion to dismiss. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, two judges dissenting. 239 So. 2d 250. The case is here on a petition for a writ of certiorari which we granted. 403 U. S. 917.
We have this day decided Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, ante, p. 156. We therefore vacate and remand the judgment in the instant case for reconsideration in light of Papachristou.
So ordered.
Mr. Justice Powell and Mr. Justice Rehnquist took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Fla. Stat. §856.02 (1965). See Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, decided this day, ante, at 157 n. 2.
§ 856.02.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Sal Aiuppa, 298 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1974)…atre refers to numerous cases striking down regulations for vagueness. The Supreme Court of the United States in the recent cases of Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville (1972) 405 U.S. 156, 92 S.Ct. 839, 31 L.Ed.2d 110, and Smith v. Florida (1972) 405 U.S. 172, 92 S.Ct. 848, 31 L.Ed.2d 122, invalidated vagrancy regulations and in doing so gave renewed emphasis to the principle vague laws are unconstitutional for failing to give fair advance notice thus allowing public officers unreasonable latitude in sup…
-
Iva Nelson Gonzales v. City OF Belle Glade, 287 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1973)…ticular words . . . are not so vague when considered in the context of the entire Statute and with a view to effectuating the purpose of the act.” As to Smith and Mc-Arthur, see note 3, supra. . 405 U.S. 156, 92 S.Ct. 839, 31 L.Ed.2d 110 (1972). . 405 U.S. 172, 92 S.Ct. 848, 31 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972). . See, e. g. Gardner v. Ceci, 312 F.Supp. 516 (E.D.Wis.1970); Pritikin v. Thurman, 311 F.Supp. 1400 (S.D.Fla.1970); Gordon v. Schiro, 310 F.Supp. 884 (E.D.La.1970); Phillips v. Borough of Folcroft, Pennsylvania…
-
Russo v. State, 270 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)…the defendant appeals. We reverse and remand for a new trial. After completion of trial court proceedings, F.S. 856.02, Laws of Í969, F.S.A., and the Jacksonville vagrancy ordinance were declared unconstitutional. Smith v. State of Florida (1972), 405 U.S. 172, 92 S.Ct. 848, 31 L.Ed.2d 122; Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville (1972), 405 U.S. 156, 92 S.Ct. 839, 31 L.Ed.2d 110. The defendant here was arrested under authority of Section 17-6, Code of the City of Plantation, Florida, the provisions of which…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 239 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1970)
- Uniformed Sanitation Men Assn., Inc. v. Comm'r of Sanitation of the City of N.Y., 403 U.S. 917 (U.S. 1971)
- Smith v. Florida, 403 U.S. 917 (U.S. 1971)