Source: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/414/966.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 19:33:22+00:00

Document:
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.
Petition for writ of certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma for further consideration in light of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 , 93 S. Ct. 2628 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115 , 93 S. Ct. 2680 (1973); United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Super 8 mm. Film, 413 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 Alexander v. Virginia, 413 U.S. 836 (1973).
It is my view that, 'at least in the absence of distribution to juveniles or obtrusive exposure to unconsenting adults, the First and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the state and federal governments from attempting wholly to suppress sexually oriented materials on the basis of their allegedly 'obscene' contents.' Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49, 113 (1973) (dissenting opinion). It is clear that, tested by that constitutional standard, 1021 is constitutionally overbroad and therefore invalid on its face. For the reasons stated in my Paris Adult dissent, I would therefore grant certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, and remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with my Paris Adult dissent.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.