People v. Mishkin
| Decision Date | 07 January 1965 |
| Citation | 15 N.Y.2d 724,256 N.Y.S.2d 936 |
| Parties | , 205 N.E.2d 201 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Edward MISHKIN, Appellant. |
| 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 on multiple counts of unlawfully possessing obscene books, unlawfully hiring others to prepare obscene books, unlawfully publishing obscene books, and failing to print the name and address of the publisher and printer.
The Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, 26 Misc.2d 152, 207 N.Y.S.2d 390, entered judgment, and the defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division modified the judgment by deleting the conviction on those counts charging the defendant with failing to print the name and address of the publisher and printer and affirmed the judgment as modified.
The Court of Appeals, 15 N.Y.2d 671, 255 N.Y.S.2d 881, 204 N.E.2d 209, affirmed the judgment and order.
Motion was made in the Court of Appeals to amend the remittitur.
Motion to amend the remittitur granted. Return of the remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Defendant argued that section 1141 of the Penal Law of the State of New York, Consol.Laws, c. 40, is invalid under the Constitution of the United States for proscribing sadistic and masochistic publications in general and as applied to the publications in this case in particular and, also, for vagueness; and, further that his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution were violated, respectively, by unlawful searches and seizures and by his conviction without proof that he was aware of the obscene nature of the publications. This Court held that section 1141 of the Penal Law was valid and that there was no violation of the rights of defendant either under the Constitution of the United States or the Amendments thereto.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Thomas
... 282 F. Supp. 729 ... UNITED STATES ex rel. Edward MISHKIN, Petitioner, ... James A. THOMAS, Warden of the City Penitentiary of the City of New York, Respondent ... 68 Civ. 464 ... United States ... 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 ... ...
-
Mishkin v. State of New York
... ... United States, 354 U.S. 476, 491—492, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1312, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498. Indeed, the definition of 'obscene' adopted by the New York courts in interpreting § 1141 delimits a narrower class of conduct than that delimited under the Roth definition, People v. Richmond County News, Inc., 9 N.Y.2d 578, 586—587, 216 N.Y.S.2d 369, 175 N.E.2d 681, 685—686 (1961), 4 and thus § 1141, like the statutes in ... Page 507 ... Roth, provides reasonably ascertainable standards of guilt. 5 ... Appellant also objects that § 1141 ... ...
-
United States v. One Carton Positive Motion Picture Film
... ... 961, 85 S.Ct. 1103, 14 L.Ed.2d 152. The United States Supreme Court has noted probable jurisdiction in a state criminal obscenity case. Mishkin v. New York (1965), 380 U.S. 960, 85 S.Ct. 1103, 14 L.Ed.2d 152. In that case the defendants were convicted of violating the provisions of a New York statute relating to the publication and distribution of obscene books. People v. Mishkin (1960), 26 Misc.2d 152, 207 N.Y.S.2d 390; (1962) 17 A.D.2d 243, 234 N.Y.S.2d 342; (1964) 15 N.Y. 2d 671, 255 N.Y.S.2d 881, 204 N.E.2d 209; ... ...
- People v. Louis