Case 2.3
Tammy is an unemployed probationer. Her probation officer has noted several times that she has been seen in the company of three girlfriends at a local park. She has a long record of convictions for various misdemeanor and felony crimes. Tammy is sentenced to three years in prison based on the following statute: “Any person not engaged in any lawful occupation, known to be a member of any gang consisting of two or more persons, who has been convicted at least three times of being a disorderly person, or who has been convicted of any crime, in this or in any other State, is declared to be a gangster….”

-Tammy's conviction is overturned based on the

Question

Case 2.3
Tammy is an unemployed probationer. Her probation officer has noted several times that she has been seen in the company of three girlfriends at a local park. She has a long record of convictions for various misdemeanor and felony crimes. Tammy is sentenced to three years in prison based on the following statute: “Any person not engaged in any lawful occupation, known to be a member of any gang consisting of two or more persons, who has been convicted at least three times of being a disorderly person, or who has been convicted of any crime, in this or in any other State, is declared to be a gangster….”

-Tammy's conviction is overturned based on the​

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Tammy's conviction is overturned based on the void-for-vagueness doctrine because the statute in question does not define what constitutes a "gang" or what qualifies as a "lawful occupation," making it unclear and vague. This lack of specificity in the law violates Tammy's due process rights by not giving her fair notice of what behavior is prohibited.

Case 2.3 Tammy Is an Unemployed Probationer. Her Probation Officer Has Noted