The overbreadth doctrine holds that a law is void on its face if it sweeps within its ambit not solely activity that is subject to governmental control, but also includes within its prohibition the practice of a protected constitutional right. 94 N.C. App. Eu v. San Francisco Democratic Com. Ms. Hines also argues that the statute is unconstitutional as applied and that it impermissibly burdens her freedom of conscience. After reviewing these arguments, we find them to be without merit.
Defendant also assigns error to the trial court's failure to dismiss count two of the indictment.
Since we have found the statute to be constitutional, we see no reason to address this assignment of error. We conclude that Ms. Hines received a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.