Case ID: so2d_596/html/1290-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Patrick Joseph SORRENTINO, Jr., Appellee.
    No. 91-00352.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 29, 1992.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Dell H. Edwards, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.
    No brief filed by appellee.
   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.