Speight v. Slaton 8212 1557

• Decision Date: 27 February 1974
• Docket Number: No. 72,72
• Citation: 39 L.Ed.2d 367,94 S.Ct. 1098,415 U.S. 333
• Parties: Alvis G. SPEIGHT, T/A Harem Book Store, et al., Appellants, v. Lewis R. SLATON, Etc., et al. —1557
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

415 U.S. 333

94 S.Ct. 1098

39 L.Ed.2d 367

Alvis G. SPEIGHT, T/A Harem Book Store, et al., Appellants,

v Lewis R. SLATON, Etc., et al.

No. 72—1557.

Argued Jan. 7, 8, 1974.

Decided Feb. 27, 1974.

Robert Eugene Smith, Baltimore, Md., for appellants.

Thomas R. Moran, Atlanta, Ga., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decision of a three-judge district court (356 F.Supp.1101) declining to intervene in a pending state civil proceeding and holding that such intervention was barred by our decision in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669. The state proceeding, brought against appellants by the Solicitor General of Fulton County, Georgia, sought an injunction against the operation of appellant Speight's bookstore, and confiscation and destruction of all merchandise on the store's premises, on the grounds that the store was being used for the 'advertising, storage, sale, and exhibition for sale of materials obscene within the meaning of Section 26—2101 of the Criminal Code of Georgia.' The basis for the State's action was § 26—2103 of the Code under which the use of any premises for the violation of § 26 2101 constitutes a 'public nuisance,' thereby triggering the application of state statutory provisions for the abatement of public nuisances, c. 72—2 of the Code of Georgia. The case is here on appeal. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1253, 2101(b). We noted probable jurisdiction to decide whether under these circumstances federal intervention in the pending state proceedings was barred by our holding in Younger v. Harris, supra.

Since oral argument of this case the Georgia Supreme Court has struck down the application of § 26—2103 in another case involving similar facts. Sanders v. State, 231 Ga. 608, 203 S.E.2d 153 (1974). In Sanders the State has brought an action to enjoin the operation of a bookstore on the ground that certain publications sold by the store were obscene under § 26—2101. The supreme court held that this application of § 26—2103 'represents an unconstitutional prior restraint when construed and applied to authorize the permanent closure of the book store as a public nuisance upon a finding that a single publication, obscene under the standards of Code Ann. § 26—2101(b), was sold on its premises.' Id., at 611, 203 S.E.2d, at 155. As we understand the Georgia court's decision, the operation of a bookstore could not be enjoined merely because some of its merchandise had been judicially determined to be obscene. The Georgia court cited both the...