Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

278 So. 2d 611

Docket Nos. 42794, 42793.

Witherspoon v. State

Amos WITHERSPOON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Harold LITTLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 30, 1973.

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1973-05-30

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“"Whoever commits any unnatural and lascivious act with another person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree."”

quoted by 6 later decisions, including Mohr v. State, Bell v. State

“"Thus, we reaffirm our holding in Chesebrough v. State, supra [ 255 So.2d 675 (Fla. 1971)], and Franklin v. State, supra [ 257 So.2d 21 (Fla. 1971)], that the words `unnatural and lascivious' or `lewd and lascivious' are of such a character that an ordinary citizen can easily determine what character of act is intended, and are thus secure from constitutional attack." Witherspoon v. State, etc., supra, at 612.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Bell v. State

Applies FL 800 § 800.02 · FL 800 § 800.04

Relies on 255 So. 2d 675 - Chesebrough v. State · 257 So. 2d 21 - Franklin v. State · 261 So. 2d 563 - Morris v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1973-05-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 1995

12 state decisions

110197319801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Robert Rosenblatt, Asst. Public Defender, for appellants.

¶2Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3*612 ADKINS, Justice.

¶4This is a direct appeal from the Metropolitan Court for Dade County which passed on the validity of Fla. Stat. § 800.02, F.S.A. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Fla. Const., art. V, § 3(b)(1), F.S.A.

¶5The statute provides:

"Whoever commits any unnatural and lascivious act with another person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree."

¶6Appellants, Witherspoon and Little, do not question the nature of the act for which they were arrested, but rather, the validity of the statute on its face. They contend that the words "unnatural and lascivious" are so vague as to make an ordinary person guess at their meaning, and so broad as to invade the right of privacy and the constitutional rights of individuals guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Rights of the State of Florida.

¶7A similar attack was raised against the use of the words "lewd and lascivious" in Fla. Stat. § 800.04, F.S.A., but this Court held the words sufficient in Chesebrough v. State, 255 So.2d 675 (Fla. 1971).

¶8Under a factual situation almost identical to the case sub judice, in Franklin v. State, 257 So.2d 21 (Fla. 1971), the words "abominable and detestable crime against nature" in Fla. Stat. § 800.01, F.S.A., were held to be fatally vague. However, in so ruling, we approved the language of the statute here under review, Fla. Stat. § 800.02, F.S.A., by ordering the defendants in Franklin v. State, supra, sentenced under that statute. See also: Morris v. State, 261 So.2d 563 (Fla.App.2d, 1972).

¶9Thus, we reaffirm our holding in Chesebrough v. State, supra, and Franklin v. State, supra, that the words "unnatural and lascivious" or "lewd and lascivious" are of such a character that an ordinary citizen can easily determine what character of act is intended, and are thus secure from constitutional attack.

¶10Accordingly, the decision of the Municipal Court for Dade County appealed from is affirmed.

¶11It is so ordered.

¶12CARLTON, C.J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

¶13ERVIN, J., dissents.

/278/so2d/611 · .json · Public domain