¶1Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and David P. Gauldin, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, and Parker D. Thomson and Carol A. Licko, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., Miami, for respondent.
¶3SHAW, Justice.
¶4We have for review Gilbert v. State,639 So.2d 191 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), wherein the district court certified the following question:
Is section 784.048, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992), facially unconstitutional as vague and overbroad?
¶5We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
¶6We have found this statute constitutional in Bouters v. State,659 So.2d 235 (Fla. 1995). Accordingly, we answer the question in the negative and approve the district court decision on this issue.
¶7It is so ordered.
¶8GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
¶9KOGAN, J., concurs specially with an opinion.
¶10KOGAN, Justice, specially concurring.
¶11The certified question is overbroad because the sole statute at issue here is subsection 784.048(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992). For that reason, I would rephrase the question as follows:
Is subsection 784.048(3), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992), facially unconstitutional as vague or overbroad?
¶12I otherwise generally agree with the majority's conclusions, but subject to the reservations I expressed in Bouters v. State,659 So.2d 235 (Fla. 1995) (Kogan, J., specially concurring), Varney v. State,659 So.2d 234 (Fla. 1995) (Kogan, J., dissenting), and Koshel v. State,659 So.2d 232 (Fla. 1995) (Kogan, J., specially concurring).