Slepicoff, Dba Graduate Enterprises v. United States, 425 U.S. 998

Slepicoff, Dba Graduate Enterprises v. United States

425 U.S. 998

SCOTUS

1976

Check Treatment

SLEPICOFF, DBA GRADUATE ENTERPRISES v. UNITED STATES

No. 75-1226

C. A. 5th Cir.

425 U.S. 998

No. 74-1349.

LOCAL 862, INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA v. FORD MOTOR CO. ET AL. C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE STEVENS took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. Reported below: .

No. 75-465.

JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT Co. v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION ET AL. C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE STEVENS took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

No. 75-1174.

TIME, INC. v. VIRGIL. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART would grant certiorari.

No. 75-1226.

SLEPICOFF, DBA GRADUATE ENTERPRISES v. UNITED STATES. C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, with whom MR. JUSTICE STEWART and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL join, dissenting.

Petitioner was convicted after jury trial in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida of mailing obscene advertisements in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1461. That section provides in pertinent part:

“Every obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device, or substance; . . .

“Is declared to be nonmailable matter and shall not be conveyed in the mails or delivered from any post office or by any letter carrier.

“Whoever knowingly uses the mails for the mailing . . . of anything declared by this section . . . to be nonmailable . . . shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years . . . .”

The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed.

524 F. 2d 1244.

I adhere to my dissent in

United States v. Orito, 413 U. S. 139, 147 (1973), in which, speaking of 18 U. S. C. § 1462, which is similar in scope to § 1461, I expressed the view that “[w]hatever the extent of the Federal Government‘s power to bar the distribution of allegedly obscene material to juveniles or the offensive exposure of such material to unconsenting adults, the statute before us is clearly overbroad and unconstitutional on its face.” . For the reasons stated in my dissent in , I would therefore grant certiorari, and, since the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was rendered after , reverse.

In these circumstances, I have no occasion to consider whether the other questions presented by petitioner merit plenary review. See

Heller v. New York, 413 U. S. 483, 494 (1973) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting).

No. 75-1240.

RODRIGUEZ ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, MR. JUSTICE STEWART, and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL would grant certiorari.

No. 75-1270.

ASSOCIATED DRY GOODS CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION OF MINNESOTA. Sup. Ct. Minn. Certiorari denied. MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.