People v. Pesky
Decision Date | 24 October 1930 |
Parties | PEOPLE v. PESKY. |
Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Philip Pesky was convicted in the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York of unlawfully possessing an indecent book in violation of Penal Law, § 1141, and from a judgment of the Appellate Division (230 App. Div. 200, 243 N. Y. S. 193), affirming judgment, defendant appeals by permission.
Affirmed.
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First department.
K. Henry Rosenberg, of New York City, for appellant.
Morris L. Ernst, of New York City, amicus curiae.
Thomas C. T. Crain, Dist. Atty., of New York City (John C. McDermott, of New York City, of counsel), for the People.
This court is a court of review, restricted in cases of this order to a pronouncement of the law, and without power to act as a trier of the facts.
If those charged with the duty to pass judgment upon the facts might say not unreasonably that the book sold by the defendant was obscene, lewd, or indecent beyond a reasonable doubt (Penal Law, § 1141 [Consol. Laws, c. 40]), we are not at liberty to substitute our judgment for theirs, or to supersedetheir function as the spokesmen of the thought and sentiment of the community in applying to the book complained of the standard of propriety established by the statute.
A different question would be here if we could say as a matter of law that the writing is so innocuous as to forbid the submission of its quality to the triers of the facts. We cannot say that here.
The judgment should be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Richmond County News, Inc.
...as 'obscene', but whether that finding is justified requires us despite contrary intimations in some of our decisions (see People v. Pesky, 254 N.Y. 373, 173 N.E. 227; People v. Muller, 96 N.Y. 408, 410) to make an independent constitutional appraisal of the magazine. This court, as the Sta......
-
Brown v. Kingsley Books, Inc.
...divided court, 335 U.S. 848, 69 S.Ct. 79, 93 L.Ed. 398; People v. Wendling, 258 N.Y. 451, 180 N.E. 169, 81 A.L.R. 799; People v. Pesky, 254 N.Y. 373, 173 N.E. 227; People v. Muller, 96 N.Y. 408) and by the United States Supreme Court. (See United States v. Alpers, 338 U.S. 680, 70 S.Ct. 352......
-
People v. Fritch
...as a matter of law the writing could be said to be so innocuous as to forbid its submission to the trial of the facts (People v. Pesky, 254 N.Y. 373, 173 N.E. 227). However, as this court stated in the Richmond County News case, supra, 9 N.Y.2d pp. 580-581, 216 N.Y.S.2d p. 370, 175 N.E.2d p......
-
Bantam Books, Inc. v. Melko
...although it was applied to Schnitzler's Reigen in People v. Pesky, 230 App.Div. 200, 243 N.Y.S. 193 (App.Div.1930), affirmed 254 N.Y. 373, 173 N.E. 227 (Ct.App.1930). All but two cases arose under section 1141 of the Penal Law, passed in its original form in 1884 and prohibiting 'any obscen......