People v. Mishkin
| Decision Date | 03 December 1964 |
| Citation | 15 N.Y.2d 671,204 N.E.2d 209,255 N.Y.S.2d 881 |
| Parties | , 204 N.E.2d 209 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent-Appellant, v. Edward MISHKIN, Appellant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342.
Defendant was convicted of unlawfully possessing obscene books, of unlawfully hiring others to prepare obscene books, of unlawfully publishing obscene books in violation of Section 1141 of the Penal Law, Consol.Laws, c. 40, and of failing to print the name and address of the publisher and printer as required by Subdivision 2 of Section 330 of the General Business Law.
The Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Benjamin Gassman, Edward F. Breslin and Edward T. Galloway, JJ., 26 Misc.2d 152, 207 N.Y.S.2d 390, entered judgment, and the defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division, 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342, modified the judgment on the law by deleting therefrom the convictions on certain counts and affirmed the judgment as modified, and held that Subdivision 2 of Section 330 of the General Business Law providing that every publication other than newspapers, magazines, or other periodicals shall have conspicuously printed in certain specified places the name and address of the publisher or printer is unconstitutional.
The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals, and the People of the State of New York cross-appealed to the Court of Appeals.
Emanuel Redfield, New York City, for defendant-appellant-respondent.
Judgment and order affirmed.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Thomas
... 282 F. Supp. 729 . UNITED STATES ex rel. Edward MISHKIN, Petitioner, . v. . James A. THOMAS, Warden of the City Penitentiary of the City of New York, Respondent. . 68 Civ. 464. . United States District ...2): . "In view of the then posture of the law in the State of New York concerning the matter of search and seizure as enunciated in People v. Defore, 242 N.Y. 13 150 N.E. 585 (1926), the question of the adequacy of the search warrant was not pursued to an ultimate finding at the trial ......
-
United States v. Klaw
......800, 383 P.2d 152, cert. denied, 375 U.S. 957, 84 S.Ct. 445, 11 L.Ed.2d 315 (1963). The New York Court of Appeals in People v. Fritch, 13 N.Y.2d 119, 243 N.Y.S.2d 1, 192 N.E.2d 713 (1963) also by a four-to-three vote held the same book to be "obscene" and reversed a ...1958) (Sobel, J.); cf. United States v. Keller, 259 F.2d 54 (3d Cir. 1958). See also People v. Mishkin, 26 Misc.2d 152, 154, 207 N.Y.S.2d 390, 393 (Ct.Spec.Sess. 1960), aff'd as modified, 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342 (1st Dept. 1962), aff'd, 15 ......
-
Figari v. New York Tel. Co.
...upon a statute similar to the ordinance involved in Talley (People v. Mishkin, 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342, affd. 15 N.Y.2d 671, 255 N.Y.S.2d 881, 204 N.E.2d 209, affd. 383 U.S. 502, 86 S.Ct. 958, 16 L.Ed.2d 56). Mishkin was convicted for possession and publication of obscene books. Som......
-
People v. Duryea
...... The reason for these holdings was that identification and fear of reprisal might deter perfectly peaceful discussions of public matters of importance. This broad Los Angeles ordinance is subject to the same infirmity.' . Following Talley, in People v. Mishkin, 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342 (1st Dept. 1962), affd., 16 N.Y.2d 671, 255 N.Y.S.2d 881, 204 N.E.2d 209 (1964), the courts of New York had the occasion to consider Section 330(2) of the General Business Law, which had provided that every publication other than newspapers and magazines should ......