SCOTT

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Mitchel Westerheide v. State, 767 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
  …” State v. Sobieck, 701 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 717 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1998); see also Scullock v. State, 377 So. 2d 682 (Fla.1979); State v. Barnes, 686 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), rev. denied, 695 So. 2d 698 (Fla.) and cert. denied, 522 U.S. 903, 118 S.Ct. 257, 139 L.Ed.2d 184 (1997). We find that this principle applies in this case. Hence, we begin our analysis of the Act by presuming that it is constitutional. B. Ex Post Facto. The appellant alleges that the Act violates the constitut…
• Zara Wilburn v. State, 763 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
  …then [s]he cannot successfully challenge it for vagueness nor complain of its vagueness as applied to the hypothetical conduct of others.” State v. Barnes, 686 So. 2d 633, 637 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), rev. denied, 695 So. 2d 698 (Fla.), and cert. denied, 522 U.S. 903, 118 S.Ct. 257, 139 L.Ed.2d 184 (1997).1 We think the evidence at trial clearly showed that appellant’s conduct fell squarely within the conduct which the statute proscribes. The state established that the patient involved was “mentally defective”…
• Jean v. State, 764 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
  …ing appellant’s vagueness claim, examine his conduct before analyzing other applications of the statute. See Kahles, 644 So. 2d at 512-13; State v. Barnes, 686 So. 2d 633, 637 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), rev. denied, 695 So. 2d 698 (Fla.), and cert. denied, 522 U.S. 903, 118 S.Ct. 257, 139 L.Ed.2d 184 (1997). “If the record demonstrates that the appellant] engaged in some conduct clearly proscribed by the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute, then he cannot successfully challenge it for vagueness nor complain…