# Raymond R. Stone v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Etc., Eugene P. Huffman v. James F. Tompkins

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · April 19, 1973 · 478 F.2d 390

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9459481

## Case

- **Full name:** Raymond R. STONE, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Etc., Respondent-Appellant; Eugene P. HUFFMAN, Petitioner-Appellee, v. James F. TOMPKINS, Respondent-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 19, 1973
- **Citations:** 478 F.2d 390; 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10412
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Roney
- **Judges:** Goldberg, Roney, Thornberry
- **Cited by:** 10 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed on other grounds by Wainwright v. Stone, 414 U.S. 21 (1973).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9459481

## Opinion text

RONEY, Circuit Judge,
(specially concurring) :
I concur in the disposition of this case on our Summary Calendar only because the Supreme Court of Florida has held that the statute under which the defendants were convicted is constitutionally void on Us face.
The statute, § 800.01, is void on its face as unconstitutional for vagueness and uncertainty in its language, violating constitutional due process to the defendants.
Franklin v. State, 257 So.2d 21, 24 (Fla.1971).
*398 The State has not argued in its brief that the statute can withstand the due process requirements of the United States Constitution. Nor, as pointed out by Judge Goldberg, has the State cited any authority which could support a denial of habeas corpus relief by the District Court to defendants who have been convicted under a statute which has been determined to be too vague and uncertain on its face to charge any crime.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9459481. Public record. Not legal advice.