State v. Flinn

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[w]hen the constitutionality of a statute is questioned every reasonable construction of the statute must be resorted to by a court in order to sustain constitutionality, and any doubt must be resolved in favor of the constitutionality of the legislative enactment.”
• requiring that statutes relating to the same subject “‘are to be read and construed together’” (quoting Syl. pt. 1, in part, Delardas v. Morgantown Water Comm’n, 148 W.Va. 776, 137 S.E.2d 426 (1964)
• “[A] statute may be constitutional in one part and unconstitutional in another.”
• \[A] statute may be constitutional in one part and unconstitutional in another.\
• “Criminal statutes, which do not impinge upon First Amendment freedoms or other similarly sensitive constitutional rights, are tested for certainty and definiteness by construing the statute in light of the conduct to which it is applied.”
• “A criminal statute must be set out with sufficient definiteness to give a person of ordinary intelligence fail’ notice that his contemplated conduct is prohibited by statute and to provide adequate standards for adjudication.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).