West v. Texas
414 U.S. 961
SCOTUS
1973
Check Treatment

*1 961 prohibit the State and Federal Governments from at- tempting wholly to suppress sexually oriented materials on the of basis their allegedly ‘obscene’ contents.” Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49, 113 (1973) (Bren nan, J., dissenting). It is clear tested that, by that consti tutional standard, § 374 (4) is constitutionally overbroad, and therefore invalid on its face. For the reasons stated in my dissent in Miller v. California, 413 U. S. 15, 47 I (1973), would therefore grant certiorari, vacate the

judgment of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with my Paris Adult I Theatre dissent. In that circumstance, I have no occasion to consider whether the other ques- tions presented merit plenary review. See Heller v. New York, 413 U. S. 494, 495 (1973) J., (Brennan, dissenting).

No. 72-1506. West v. Texas. Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Miller California, v. 413 U. S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult I Theatre v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U. S. 115 (1973); United States v. 12 200-Ft. Reels Film, 413 of U. S. 123 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U. S. 139 (1973); Heller v. New York, 413 U. S. 483 (1973); Roaden v. Kentucky, 413 U. S. 496 (1973); and Alex- ander v. Virginia, 413 U. S. 836 (1973). Mr. Justice of Douglas, being the view that state obscenity regula- tion prohibited is by the Fourteenth and First Amend- (see ments Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49, 70 (Douglas, J., dissenting)), grant would certiorari and reverse the judgment of conviction. Mr. Justice Brennan, with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Marshall join, dissenting.

Petitioner was convicted on charges of exhibiting 962 Code, Penal Tex. of in violation matter obscene

allegedly as provides which 1972-1973), (Supp. 3 527, § Art. *2 follows: causes or knowingly: sends who person

“Every into brought, be to or causes brings or sent, to be in this state or distribution, or for sale state this exhibits, prints, publishes, distribution, for prepares pos- in his or distribute, has offers to or distributes, or exhibit or to distribute to intent with session aof guilty matter is any obscene distribute, to offer misdemeanor.” the absence of in that, “at least my view

It is uncon- to exposure obtrusive or juveniles to distribution Amendments and Fourteenth the First adults, senting from at- Federal Governments and the State prohibit materials sexually oriented wholly suppress to tempting Paris contents.” 'obscene’ allegedly basis their on the of (1973) 113 49, I v. 413 U. S. Slaton, Theatre Adult by that that, It clear tested opinion). is (dissenting constitutionally 3, is 527, § Art. standard, constitutional For the on its invalid face. and therefore overbroad California, 413 in Miller v. my in dissent reasons stated certiorari, grant I 47 would therefore (1973), 15, U. S. of Criminal Court the Texas judgment the of vacate not incon- proceedings for further remand and Appeals, Theatre In Paris Adult I. that my in with dissent sistent whether the I occasion consider have no to circumstance, plenary merit review. petition in presented the questions York, (1973) 494 Heller New 413 483, v. U. S. See J., dissenting). (Brennan, Jersey. Super. Ct. N. v. New J.

No. 72-1524. Roth remanded vacated, and case judgment granted, Certiorari California, in Miller v. light of for further consideration