Citation network
Hamling Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 24, 1974
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
-
Hamling v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 418 U.S. 87 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Hamling v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974) Hamling v. UnitedSearch
-
obscene Illustrated Report. Following affirmance of the convictions by the Court of Appeals, this Court decided Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
for rehearing. Petitioners challenge their convictions based upon the pre- Miller obscenity test in Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
offensive representations or descriptions of that specific hard core' sexual conduct given as examples in Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Bouie v. CitySearch
-
a legal term of art and not a generic expression, had a definite legal meaning. Russell v. UnitedSearch
-
of the contents of materials that he distributes, and that he knew the character and nature of the materials. Rosen v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Smith v. CaliforniaSearch
-
interest in sex) may consider the material's prurient appeal to clearly defined deviant sexual groups. Mishkin v. NewSearch
-
relevant in determining obscenity, as long as the proper constitutional definition of obscenity is applied, Ginzburg v. UnitedSearch
-
by the Court of Appeals to be reconsidered in light of this Court's decision, announced June 21, 1973, in Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of law shall govern obscenity convictions that occurred prior to the date on which this Court's decision in Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
to their convictions based upon the so-called Memoirs test for the proscription of obscenity. ( Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Page 418 U. S. 99 were convicted, were not strangers to this Court prior to the Miller decision. In Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 354 U. S. 480 . That holding was reaffirmed in United States v. ReidelSearch
-
U. S. 351 (1971). See also Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. DaySearch
-
Ginzburg v. UnitedSearch
-
These petitioners were tried and convicted under the definition of obscenity originally announced by the Court in Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
States, supra, and significantly refined by the plurality opinion in Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
the jury to judge the obscenity of material which, as here, has been placed into evidence. See Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
U. S. 49 , 413 U. S. 56 (1973), Kaplan v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of course, long been the rule that consistency in verdicts or judgments of conviction is not required. United States v. DotterweichSearch
-
Dunn v. UnitedSearch
-
as to the same material does not mean that constitutional rights are abridged. As this Court observed in Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
results under any criminal statute. That is one of the consequences we accept under our jury system. Cf. Dunlop v. UnitedSearch
-
Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
in jury verdicts as to the obscenity vel non of identical materials is not constitutionally required, Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
occurring after a relevant event in a case will be given effect while the case is on direct review. United States v. SchoonerSearch
-
Bradley v. SchoolSearch
-
and this Court's decisions, at least since Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
that the Memoirs plurality test had represented a sharp break with the test of obscenity as announced in Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
States, supra, our decision in Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
questions, the standards in federal obscenity prosecutions must be national ones, relying on Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. DaySearch
-
U.S. at 370 U. S. 488 (opinion of Harlan, J.), and United States v. PalladinoSearch
-
Id. at 413 U. S. 24 . When this approach is coupled with the reaffirmation in Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
person Page 418 U. S. 105 in other areas of the law. Stone v. NewSearch
-
Schulz v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
today arrived at standards for testing the constitutionality of state legislation regulating obscenity. See Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
we see no constitutional impediment to a similar rule for federal prosecutions. In Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of each juror's personal opinion nor by its effect on a particularly sensitive or insensitive person or group. Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Mishkin v. NewSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Hamling v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial