Johnson v. Florida/Dissent White

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
Dissenting Opinion
White

United States Supreme Court

391 U.S. 596

Johnson  v.  Florida


Mr. Justice WHITE, with whom Mr. Justice HARLAN joins, dissenting.

Florida's courts have obviously interpreted their statute to permit a showing that a defendant was on a park bench at 4:25 a.m. 'without any lawful purpose or object' to establish a prima facie case that the defendant was 'wandering or strolling around' without lawful purpose. Most inhabitants of park benches reach their bench by wandering or strolling. So interpreting the statute, constitutionally sufficient amounts of evidence were presented.

The Court does not reach the claim appellant makes here, that Florida's statute offends the Constitution because it is vague. That claim is substantial, and I would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.

Notes[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).