State v. Worthington
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Principles of “due process” require courts to declare a criminal statute unconstitutionally vague if the statute fails to clearly define what is prohibited. Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 33 L.Ed. 2d 222, 92 S.Ct. 2294 (1972); State v. Evans, 73 N.C. App. 214, 326 S.E. 2d 303 (1985). A statute is “void for vagueness” if it forbids or requires doing an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application. Coates v. Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611, 29 L.Ed. 2d 214, 91 S.Ct. 1686 (1971); In re Burrus, 275…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Smith v. GoguenSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Coates v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. MelloCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- State v. SinnottCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
- Welling v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994