State v. Sorrentino, 596 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Sorrentino, 596 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Florida
v.
Patrick Joseph SORRENTINO, Jr.
No. 91-00352.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Apr 29, 1992.
596 So. 2d 1290
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Dell H. Edwards, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant., No brief filed by appellee.
Blue, Campbell, Hall.
Published
PER CURIAM.

The issue on appeal is the constitutionality of a section of the witness tampering statute, section 914.22(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989). The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the charge finding section 914.22(l)(b) unconstitutional.

We find that the reasons for the decision in State v. Cohen, 568 So.2d 49 (Fla.1990), when it declared subsections (l)(a) and (3) unconstitutional, do not apply here. Subsection (l)(b) is clear in the type of inducement it proscribes and the object of the inducement. We reverse the order finding it unconstitutional.

Reversed.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and HALL and BLUE, JJ., concur.