Friedman v. United States

Decision Date02 June 1975
Docket NumberNo. 74-1130,74-1130
Citation421 U.S. 1004,44 L.Ed.2d 673,95 S.Ct. 2407
PartiesMelvin FRIEDMAN et al. v. UNITED STATES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting.

Petitioner Sooner State News Agency was convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas of transporting obscene literature through the United States mail in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1465, which provides in pertinent part as follows:

'Whoever knowingly transports in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of sale or distribution any obscene, lewd, lascivious, or filthy book, pamphlet, picture, film, paper, letter, writing, print, silhouette, drawing, figure, image, cast, phonograph recording, electrical transcription or other article capable of producing sound or any other matter of indecent or immoral character, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.'

Petitioners Friedman, Mitchum, Fishman, and Boyd were convicted in the same District Court of conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1465. 18 U.S.C. § 371. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed all of petitioners' convictions. 506 F.2d 511 (1974).

I adhere to my dissent in United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139, 147, 93 S.Ct. 2674, 37 L.Ed.2d 513 (1973), in which, speaking of 18 U.S.C. § 1462, which is similar in scope to § 1465, I expressed the view that '[w]hatever the extent of the Federal Government's power to bar the distribution of allegedly obscene material to juveniles or the offensive exposure of such material to unconsenting adults, the statute before us is clearly overbroad and unconstitutional on its face.' Id., at 147-148, 93 S.Ct. 2674. For the reasons stated in my dissent in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 47, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973), I would therefore grant certiorari, and, since the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was rendered after Orito, reverse.

In that circumstance, I have no occasion to consider whether the other questions presented merit plenary review. See Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483, 494, 93 S.Ct. 2789, 37 L.Ed.2d 745 (1973) (Brennan, J., dissenting).

Finally, it does not appear from the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
119 cases
  • In re Airport Car Rental Antitrust Litigation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • June 25, 1979
    ...S.Ct. 54, 27 L.Ed.2d 88 (1970), on remand, 376 F.Supp. 125 (D.Mass.), aff'd, 508 F.2d 547 (1 Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S.Ct. 2407, 44 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975). In Whitten, a manufacturer and designer of swimming pool gutters and accessories, which was also a general contractor f......
  • Domed Stadium Hotel, Inc. v. Holiday Inns, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • May 21, 1984
    ...a finding of attempt to monopolize. See Whitten v. Paddock Pool Builders, 508 F.2d 547 (1st Cir.1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S.Ct. 2407, 44 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975) (3%); Mullis v. Arco Petroleum Corp., 502 F.2d 290, 297 (7th Cir.1974) (3%); Harris v. Atlantic-Richfield Company, 469 F.S......
  • Copperweld Corporation v. Independence Tube Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 19, 1984
    ...(CA5 1978); George R. Whitten, Jr., Inc. v. Paddock Pool Builders, Inc., 508 F.2d 547, 557 (CA1 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S.Ct. 2407, 44 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975). 9. See, e.g., Report of the Attorney General's National Committee to Study the Antitrust Laws 30-36 (1955) (hereinafter c......
  • People v. Smith
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • December 28, 1984
    ...217 Pa.Super. 317, 274 A.2d 546 (1970), 29 and State v. Murray, 84 Wash.2d 527, 527 P.2d 1303 (1974), cert. den. 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S.Ct. 2407, 44 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975). The seizure of the trailer occurred before the police located the VIN and checked it against the stolen vehicle lists. The po......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 books & journal articles
  • RULE 103
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (2022 ed.) (CBA) Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure
    • Invalid date
    ...property, or right to the use of his property. Bernhardt v. Commodity Option Co., 187 Colo. 89, 528 P.2d 919 (1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S. Ct. 2406, 44 L. Ed. 2d 673 (1975). The whole object of garnishment is to reach effects or credits in the garnishee's hands, and to subject ......
  • Monopsony and Backward Integration: Section 2 Violations in the Buyer's Market
    • United States
    • Seattle University School of Law Seattle University Law Review No. 11-03, March 1988
    • Invalid date
    ...U.S. 1116 (1979); Whitten v. Paddock Pool Builders, Inc., 376 F. Supp. 125 (D. Mass.). affd, 508 F.2d 547 (1st Cir. 1974), cert denied, 421 U.S. 1004 (1975) (rejecting Albert Pick-Barth Co. v. Mitchell Woodbury Corp., 57 F.2d 96 (1st Cir.), cert denied, 286 U.S. 552 (1932), rule of per se i......
  • Should a Trade Secrets Misappropriation Claim Lie in the Procrustean Antitrust Bed?
    • United States
    • Sage Antitrust Bulletin No. 22-1, March 1977
    • March 1, 1977
    ...236-238 infra.55 368 F. Supp. 306 (S.D. Fla. 1973).56 Id.at308-309.57 Id. at 309.58 Id.59 508 F. 2d 547 (1st Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004 (1975).80 Id.at548.81 376 F. Supp. 125, 136 (D.Mass. 1974).62 The court adoptedtheintercorporate or "bathtub" conspiracy doc-trine. 508 F. 2d ......
  • COLORADO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (CBA) Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure
    • Invalid date
    ...property, or right to the use of his property. Bernhardt v. Commodity Option Co., 187 Colo. 89, 528 P.2d 919 (1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1004, 95 S. Ct. 2406, 44 L. Ed. 2d 673 (1975). The whole object of garnishment is to reach effects or credits in the garnishee's hands, and to subject ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT