Citation network
Kaplan Vs. California
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 1973
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 115 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Kaplan v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U.S. 115 (1973) Kaplan v. CaliforniaSearch
-
proof is not required) result from the continuing circulation of obscene literature. See Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
was an adequate basis for establishing whether the book here involved was obscene. See Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
obscene nature, or other ancillary evidence of obscenity, is not constitutionally required. Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
for the County of Los Angeles affirmed petitioner's conviction. Relying on the dissenting opinions in Jacobellis v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 184 , 378 U. S. 199 , 203 (1964), and MR. JUSTICE WHITE's dissent in Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of expression protected by the First Amendment, no distinction was made as to the medium of the expression. See Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
similarly conceived First Amendment standards to moving pictures, to photographs, and to words in books. See Freedman v. MarylandSearch
-
Times Film Corp. v. ChicagoSearch
-
Kingsley Pictures Corp. v. RegentsSearch
-
Superior Films, Inc. v. DeptSearch
-
they collide with the long-settled position of this Court that obscenity is not protected by the Constitution. Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
of a legislative body to enact such regulatory laws on the basis of unprovable assumptions. See Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
or thrust it upon the general public. The trial court denied the motion. Today, this Court, in Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
of obscene materials to anyone, including consenting adults, is subject to state regulation. See also United States v. OritoSearch
-
United States v. Thirty-sevenSearch
-
defense testimony to the contrary. In Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
are constitutionally adequate to establish whether a work is obscene. We also reject in Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
I, ante at 413 U. S. 56 . The defense should be free to introduce appropriate expert testimony, see Smith v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Ginzburg v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 383 U. S. 463 , 383 U. S. 465 (1966). See United States v. GronerSearch
-
Both Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
is vacated, and the case remanded to that court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion, Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
supra, and Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
defined by the California courts and by this Court is too vague to satisfy the requirements of due process. See Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
minors from the premises. In this case, there is no evidence that petitioner sold materials to juveniles. Cf. Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
This Court, since Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 354 U. S. 476 (1957), has only once held books to be obscene. That case was Mishkin v. NewSearch
-
court affirmed, by an equally divided court, a conviction for sale of an unillustrated book. Doubleday & Co., Inc. v. NewSearch
-
for possible violation of First Amendment rights, and has regularly reversed convictions on that basis. See Childs v. OregonSearch
-
Walker v. OhioSearch
-
Keney v. NewSearch
-
Friedman v. NewSearch
-
Sheperd v. NewSearch
-
Avansino v. NewSearch
-
Books, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
A Quantity of Books v. KansasSearch
-
Redrup v. NewSearch
-
Grove Press, Inc. v. GersteinSearch
-
Marcus v. SearchSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial