Case Name: Nery E. NAVAJERO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2004-12-01
Citations: 888 So. 2d 144
Docket Number: No. 3D04-26
Parties: Nery E. NAVAJERO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and LEVY, J., and DAUKSCH, JAMES C„ Senior Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 888
Pages: 144–144

Head Matter:
Nery E. NAVAJERO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D04-26.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Dec. 1, 2004.
Bennett H. Brummer and Harvey J. Sepler, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and LEVY, J., and DAUKSCH, JAMES C„ Senior Judge.

Opinion:
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
Even assuming the correctness of our holding in Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), appeal docketed, No. SC 03-2103 (Fla. Nov. 10, 2003)(argued Oct. 7, 2004), that the Florida Sexual Predator Act, section 775.21, Florida Statutes (1999), is unconstitutional, contra Milks v. State, 848 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), review granted, 859 So.2d 514 (Fla.2003)(argued Oct. 7, 2004); Reyes v. State, 854 So.2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Therrien v. State, 859 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Zaveta v. State, 856 So.2d 1058 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), we find no merit in the present challenge to the validity of the quite different and less intrusive Sex Offender Registration Act, section 943.0435, Florida Statutes (2003). See Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 123 S.Ct. 1140, 155 L.Ed.2d 164 (2003); Connecticut Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. 1, 123 S.Ct. 1160, 155 L.Ed.2d 98 (2003).
Affirmed.