Case Name: Nissinoff et al. v. California
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1974-01-07
Citations: 414 U.S. 1122
Docket Number: No. 73-318
Parties: Nissinoff et al. v. California.
Judges: Mr. Justice Douglas, being of the view that state obscenity regulation is prohibited by the Fourteenth and First Amendments (see Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49, 70 (Douglas, J., dissenting)), would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment of conviction.
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 414
Pages: 1122–1123

Head Matter:
No. 73-318.
Nissinoff et al. v. California.

Opinion:
App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., County of Alameda. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Miller v. California, 413 U. S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U. S. 115 (1973); United States v. 12 200-Ft. Reels of 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).
Mr. Justice Douglas, being of the view that state obscenity regulation is prohibited by the Fourteenth and First Amendments (see Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49, 70 (Douglas, J., dissenting)), would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment of conviction.