Redrup v. State of New York Austin State of Kentucky Gent v. State of Arkansas, Nos. 3

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM; HARLAN
Citation18 L.Ed.2d 515,386 U.S. 767,87 S.Ct. 1414
PartiesRobert REDRUP, Petitioner, v. STATE OF NEW YORK. William L. AUSTIN, Petitioner, v . STATE OF KENTUCKY. GENT et al., Appellants, v. STATE OF ARKANSAS
Decision Date08 May 1967
Docket Number16,50,Nos. 3

386 U.S. 767
87 S.Ct. 1414
18 L.Ed.2d 515
Robert REDRUP, Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF NEW YORK. William L. AUSTIN, Petitioner, v . STATE OF KENTUCKY. GENT et al., Appellants, v. STATE OF ARKANSAS.

Nos. 3, 16, 50.
Argued Oct. 10 and 11, 1966.
Decided May 8, 1967.
Rehearing Denied June 12, 1967.

See 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2091.

Sam Rosenwein, Burbank, Cal., for petitioner Redrup.

H. Richard Uviller, New York City, for respondent State of New York.

Stanley Fleishman, Hollywood, Cal., for petitioner Austin.

John B. Browning, Frankfort, Ky., for respondent State of Kentucky.

Emanuel Redfield, New York City, for appellant Gent et al.

Fletcher Jackson, Little Rock, Ark., for appellee State of Arkansas.

Page 768

PER CURIAM.

These three cases arise from a recurring conflict—the conflict between asserted state power to suppress the distribution of books and magazines through criminal or civil proceedings, and the guarantees of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

I.

In No. 3, Redrup v. New York, the petitioner was a clerk at a New York City newsstand. A plainclothes patrolman approached the newsstand, saw two paperback books on a rack—Lust Pool, and Shame Agent—and asked for them by name. The petitioner handed him the books and collected the price of $1.65. As a result of this transaction, the petitioner was charged in the New York City Criminal Court with violating a state criminal law.1 He was convicted, and the conviction was affirmed on appeal.

In No. 16, Austin v. Kentucky, the petitioner owned and operated a retail bookstore and newsstand in Paducah, Kentucky. A woman resident of Paducah purchased two magazines from a sales-girl in the petitioner's store, after asking for them by name—High Heels, and Spree. As a result of this transaction the petitioner stands convicted

Page 769

in the Kentucky courts for violating a criminal law of that State.2

In No. 50, Gent v. Arkansas, the prosecuting attorney of the Eleventh Judicial District of Arkansas brought a civil proceeding under a state statute3 to have certain issues of various magazines declared obscene, to enjoin their distribution and to obtain a judgment ordering their surrender and destruction. The magazines proceeded against were: Gent, Swank, Bachelor, Modern Man, Cavalcade, Gentleman, Ace, and Sir. The County Chancery Court entered the requested judgment after a trial with an advisory jury, and the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, with minor modifications.4

In none of the cases was there a claim that the statute in question reflected a specific and limited state concern for juveniles. See Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 64 S.Ct. 438, 88 L.Ed. 645; cf. Butler v. State of Michigan, 352 U.S. 380, 77 S.Ct. 524, 1 L.Ed.2d 412. In none was there any suggestion of an assault upon individual privacy by publication in a manner so obtrusive as to make it impossible for an unwilling individual to avoid exposure to it. Cf. Breard v. City of Alexandria, 341 U.S. 622, 71 S.Ct. 920, 95 L.Ed. 1233; Public Utilities Comm'n of District of Columbia v. Pollak, 343 U.S. 451, 72 S.Ct. 813, 96 L.Ed. 1068. And in none was there evidence of the sort of 'pandering' which the Court found significant in Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463, 86 S.Ct. 942, 16 L.Ed.2d 31.

II.

The Court originally limited review in these cases to certain particularized questions, upon the hypothesis that the material involved in each case was of a character described as 'obscene in the constitutional sense' in A Book Named 'John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure' v. Attorney General of Com. of

Page 770

Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 418, 86 S.Ct. 975, 977, 16 L.Ed.2d 1.5 But we have concluded that the hypothesis upon wic h the Court originally proceeded was invalid, and accordingly that the cases can and should be decided upon a common and controlling fundamental constitutional basis, without prejudice to the questions upon which review was originally granted. We have concluded, in short, that the distribution of the publications in each of these cases is protected by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
316 practice notes
  • State v. J-R Distributors, Inc., J-R
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 27 Julio 1973
    ...defendant contends the materials involved herein are not obscene in the constitutional sense. It is argued that since Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 1414, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), there has been no verbal definition of 'obscene' acceptable to the United States Supreme Court. Defen......
  • Cine-Com Theatres Eastern States, Inc. v. Lordi, Civ. A. No. 911-72.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 20 Noviembre 1972
    ...which is not utterly without redeeming social value is protected by the First Amendment— has never been rejected. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 2091, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), which defendants cite as rejecting the Memoirs test, merely holds that under any of the standards —that o......
  • Marks v. United States v. 1976, No. 75-708
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 1 Marzo 1977
    ...Members of the Court, the Court began the practice of disposing of obscenity cases in brief per curiam decisions. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 1414, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), was the first. At least 31 cases were decided in this fashion. They are collected in Paris Adult Theatre ......
  • Miller v. California 8212 73 18 8212 19, 1972, No. 70
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 21 Junio 1973
    ...1279—1282, 20 L.Ed.2d 195 (1968); Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. Dallas, supra, 390 U.S., at 690, 88 S.Ct., at 1306; Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 769, 87 S.Ct., 1414, 1415, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967); Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 195, 84 S.Ct. 1676, 1682, 12 L.Ed.2d 793 (1964). See Rabe v......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
314 cases
  • State v. J-R Distributors, Inc., J-R
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 27 Julio 1973
    ...defendant contends the materials involved herein are not obscene in the constitutional sense. It is argued that since Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 1414, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), there has been no verbal definition of 'obscene' acceptable to the United States Supreme Court. Defen......
  • Cine-Com Theatres Eastern States, Inc. v. Lordi, Civ. A. No. 911-72.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 20 Noviembre 1972
    ...which is not utterly without redeeming social value is protected by the First Amendment— has never been rejected. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 2091, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), which defendants cite as rejecting the Memoirs test, merely holds that under any of the standards —that o......
  • Marks v. United States v. 1976, No. 75-708
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 1 Marzo 1977
    ...Members of the Court, the Court began the practice of disposing of obscenity cases in brief per curiam decisions. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 1414, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967), was the first. At least 31 cases were decided in this fashion. They are collected in Paris Adult Theatre ......
  • Miller v. California 8212 73 18 8212 19, 1972, No. 70
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 21 Junio 1973
    ...1279—1282, 20 L.Ed.2d 195 (1968); Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. Dallas, supra, 390 U.S., at 690, 88 S.Ct., at 1306; Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767, 769, 87 S.Ct., 1414, 1415, 18 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967); Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 195, 84 S.Ct. 1676, 1682, 12 L.Ed.2d 793 (1964). See Rabe v......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Pornography and Politics: the Court, the Constitution, and the Commission
    • United States
    • Political Research Quarterly Nbr. 24-4, December 1971
    • 1 Diciembre 1971
    ...Cal. 2d 199 (1966) (preparation of obscene materials for artist’spersonal growth without intent to distribute cannot be made a crime).28 386 U.S. 767 (1967).29 Keney v. New York, 388 U.S. 440 (1967) ; Friedman v. New York, 388 U.S. 441 (1967);Ratner v. California, 388 U.S. 442 ( 1967) ; Cob......
  • Rethinking Democracy
    • United States
    • Political Research Quarterly Nbr. 63-1, March 2010
    • 1 Marzo 2010
    ...to add Minneapolis City Code, Minn., 1st Reading, Nov. 23, 1983.R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minn., 505 U.S. 377 (1992).Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767 (1967).Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969).Unit......

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