Wainwright v. Stone
Supreme Court of the United States
1Per curiam
In separate trials, appellees were convicted of violating Fla. Stat. §800.01 (1965), which proscribed “the abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with beast . ...” Having exhausted state remedies, 2 appellees sought federal habeas corpus, asserting, among other things, that the Florida statute was impermissibly vague. The writ was granted to both appellees. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the sole ground that § 800.01 was unconstitutionally vague and void on its face for failure to give appellees adequate notice that the conduct for which they were convicted…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. HarrissSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Winters v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Beauharnais v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Mishkin v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by312 opinions
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Rose v. LockeSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Brown v. BuhmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
- People v. PetrellaMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
307 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.