Case ID: minn_130/html/0532-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE v. ANNA W. LOWRY.
    
    July, 2, 1915.
    Nos. 19,179—(7).
    Violation of city ordinance.
    Conviction for using obscene language. Held: The fact that the words uttered may have been quoted from a standard work on theology does not justify their utterance in a public assembly. [Reporter.]
    From a judgment of the municipal court of Winona convicting her of a violation of the city ordinance, defendant appealed to the district court for that county. The appeal was heard before Snow, J., who denied plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the appeal and affirmed the judgment. From the order affirming the judgment, defendant appealed.
    Affirmed.
    
      William N. M. Crawford, for appellant.
    
      Karl Finkelburg, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 153 N. W. 305.
    
   Per Curiam.

Appellant was convicted in the municipal court of the city of Winona of violating an ordinance prohibiting the use of obscene language in a public place in the city. Upon appeal to the district court an order was made affirming the conviction, and she appeals. The language was used in a lecture to a large assemblage of women in a public hall in the city. The validity of the ordinance is not questioned. We sustain the finding of the courts below that appellant violated the ordinance. The fact that the language uttered may have been a quotation from some standard work on theology did not justify its use in a public assembly. What is printed may not bear repetition in all places and upon all occasions.

Affirmed.