Court Opinion

ID: 8986119
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-27 11:46:05.560227+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:10:47.340438
License: Public Domain

*904Appeal from D. C. M. D. Tenn. Reported below: 315 F. Supp. 695;
*905No: 71-599.
No. 72-683.
No. 72-815.
No. 72-1256.
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Tenn. Reported below: 225 Tenn. 399, 469 S. W. 2d 669;
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ohio. Reported below: 27 Ohio St. 2d 278, 272 N. E. 2d 137;
Appeal from Sup. Ct. S. C. Reported below: 259 S. C. 185, 191 S. E. 2d 135;
Appeal from D. C. Md. Reported below: 352 F. Supp. 530; and
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ohio. Reported below: 32 Ohio St. 2d 237, 291 N. E. 2d 451. Motion of appellants to strike appellee's supplemental brief in No. 71-599 denied. Judgments vacated and cases remanded for further consideration in light of Miller v. California, ante, p. 15; Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, ante, p. 49; Kaplan v. California, ante, p. 115; United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels Film, ante, p. 123; United States v. Orito, ante, p. 139; Heller v. New York, ante, p. 483; Roaden v. Kentucky, ante, p. 496; and Alexander v. Virginia, ante, p. 836.
Mr. Justice Douglas would reverse the judgments. See Miller v. California, ante, p. 37. Mr. Justice Brennan, joined by Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Marshall, would vacate the judgments and remand cases for further proceedings not inconsistent with his dissent in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, ante, p. 73. See Miller v. California, ante, p. 47.