LEE ART THEATRE, INC. v. VIRGINIA, 392 U.S. 636 (1968)
- Argued:
- N/A
- Decided:
- June 17, 1968
- Decided by:
- Warren Court, 1967
- Legal Principle at Issue:
- Whether judge issuing warrant to seize allegedly obscene motion pictures acted using the proper constitutional safeguards when issuing such warrant.
- Action:
- Reversed and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.
Concurring Opinion
Dissenting Opinion
LEE ART THEATRE, INC.
v.
VIRGINIA.
Supreme Court of United States.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
Plato Cacheris for petitioner.
James B. Wilkinson for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. Petitioner, operator of a motion picture theatre in Richmond, Virginia, was convicted in the Hustings Court of Richmond of possessing and exhibiting lewd and obscene motion pictures in violation of Title 18.1-228 of the Code of Virginia. The Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia refused a writ of error.
The films in question were admitted in evidence over objection that they had been unconstitutionally seized. The seizure was under the authority of a warrant issued by a justice of the peace on the basis of an affidavit of a police officer which stated only the titles of the motion pictures and that the officer had determined from personal observation of them and of the billboard in front of the theatre that the films were obscene.
*637 The admission of the films in evidence requires reversal of petitioner’s conviction. A seizure of allegedly obscene books on the authority of a warrant “issued on the strength of the conclusory assertions of a single police officer, without any scrutiny by the judge of any materials considered . . . obscene,” was held to be an unconstitutional seizure in Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U. S. 717, 731-732. It is true that a judge may read a copy of a book in courtroom or chambers but not as easily arrange to see a motion picture there. However, we need not decide in this case whether the justice of the peace should have viewed the motion picture before issuing the warrant. The procedure under which the warrant issued solely upon the conclusory assertions of the police officer without any inquiry by the justice of the peace into the factual basis for the officer’s conclusions was not a procedure “designed to focus searchingly on the question of obscenity,” id., at 732, and therefore fell short of constitutional requirements demanding necessary sensitivity to freedom of expression. See Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U. S. 51, 58-59.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, and MR. JUSTICE STEWART base their concurrence in the judgment of reversal upon Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.
A police officer filed a sworn affidavit that he had personally witnessed the commission of a crime, to wit, the possession and exhibition of obscene motion pictures. He was granted a warrant to seize the pictures, and did so.
*638 In Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U. S. 717, officers were given a general warrant to seize obscene materials, pursuant to which they selected and seized 11,000 copies of 280 publications most of which were later found nonobscene. With barely a nod to the difference between 11,000 books and magazines selected for seizure by the officers themselves after a warrant had been issued and two obscene movies named in the affidavit, the Court reverses the present conviction on the authority of Marcus.
I think that Marcus was correctly decided, but I cannot discern its application here. Police officers may not be given carte blanche to seize, but they may certainly seize a specifically named item on probable cause, before the work “taken as a whole” has been adjudicated obscene. Any other rule would make adjudication not merely “not as easily arrange[d]” in the case of movies but quite impossible. If the Court means only that the officer should not merely say that he has seen a movie and considers it obscene, but should offer something in the way of a box score of what transpires therein, I consider it absurd to think that a magistrate, armed with the luminous guidance this Court has afforded, will be thus able to make a better judgment of probable obscenity.
Since the petitioner does not contend that the movies in question here were not obscene, I find it unnecessary to reach the point relied on by my Brothers BLACK, DOUGLAS, and STEWART.
EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, et al., PETITIONERS v. ENTERTAINMENT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, et al., 564 U.S. 786 (2011)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
UNITED STATES v. MICHAEL WILLIAMS, 553 U.S. 285 (2008)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
JOHN D. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION et al., 542 U.S. 656 (2004)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CITY OF LITTLETON, COLORADO v. Z. J. GIFTS D-4, L. L. C., A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, DBA CHRISTAL’S, 541 U.S. 774 (2004)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
UNITED STATES, et al. v. AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., 539 U.S. 194 (2003)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CITY OF LOS ANGELES v. ALAMEDA BOOKS, INC., et al., 535 U.S. 425 (2002)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, et al., 535 U.S. 564 (2002)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
JOHN D. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al. v. THE FREE SPEECH COALITION et al., 535 U.S. 234 (2002)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
UNITED STATES, et al. v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, INC., 529 U.S. 803 (2000)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
CITY OF ERIE, et al. v. PAP’S A. M., TDBA ‘KANDYLAND’, 529 U.S. 277 (2000)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
JANET RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION et al., 521 U.S. 844 (1997)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
UNITED STATES v. X-CITEMENT VIDEO, INC., et al., 513 U.S. 64 (1994)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
FERRIS J. ALEXANDER, SR. v. UNITED STATES, 509 U.S. 544 (1993)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MICHAEL BARNES, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, INDIANA, et al. v. GLEN THEATRE, INC., et al., 501 U.S. 560 (1991)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
OSBORNE v. OHIO, 495 U.S. 103 (1990)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
FW/PBS, INC., DBA PARIS ADULT BOOKSTORE II, et al. v. CITY OF DALLAS et al., 493 U.S. 215 (1990)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
SABLE COMMUNICATIONS OF CALIFORNIA, INC. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al., 492 U.S. 115 (1989)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MASSACHUSETTS v. OAKES, 491 U.S. 576 (1989)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
FORT WAYNE BOOKS, INC. v. INDIANA et al., 489 U.S. 46 (1989)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
POPE et al. v. ILLINOIS, 481 U.S. 497 (1987)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CITY OF NEWPORT, KENTUCKY, et al. v. IACOBUCCI, DBA TALK OF THE TOWN, et al., 479 U.S. 92 (1986)
- Lower Court Ruling:
- Overruled (in part)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
ARCARA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY v. CLOUD BOOKS, INC., DBA VILLAGE BOOK & NEWS STORE, et al., 478 U.S. 697 (1986)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
BETHEL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 et al. v. FRASER, A MINOR, et al., 478 U.S. 675 (1986)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
NEW YORK v. P.J. VIDEO, INC., DBA NETWORK VIDEO, et al., 475 U.S. 868 (1986)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Search & Seizure
CITY OF RENTON et al. v. PLAYTIME THEATRES, INC., et al., 475 U.S. 41 (1986)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
BROCKETT v. SPOKANE ARCADES, INC., et al., 472 U.S. 491 (1985)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
NEW YORK v. FERBER, 458 U.S. 747 (1982)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
CALIFORNIA ex rel. COOPER, CITY ATTORNEY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA v. MITCHELL BROTHERS’ SANTA ANA THEATER et al., 454 U.S. 90 (1981)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY v. BELLANCA, DBA THE MAIN EVENT, et al., 452 U.S. 714 (1981)
- Lower Court Ruling:
- Overruled (in part)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
SCHAD et al. v. BOROUGH OF MOUNT EPHRAIM, 452 U.S. 61 (1981)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
FLYNT et al. v. OHIO, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
VANCE et al. v. UNIVERSAL AMUSEMENT CO., INC., et al., 445 U.S. 308 (1980)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION v. PACIFICA FOUNDATION et al., 438 U.S. 726 (1978)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
ZURCHER, CHIEF OF POLICE OF PALO ALTO, et al. v. STANFORD DAILY et al., 436 U.S. 547 (1978)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Cases on Campus
PINKUS, DBA ROSSLYN NEWS CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES, 436 U.S. 293 (1978)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
WARD v. ILLINOIS, 431 U.S. 767 (1977)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
SPLAWN v. CALIFORNIA, 431 U.S. 595 (1977)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
SMITH v. UNITED STATES, 431 U.S. 291 (1977)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MARKS et al. v. UNITED STATES, 430 U.S. 188 (1977)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
YOUNG, MAYOR OF DETROIT, et al. v. AMERICAN MINI THEATRES, INC., et al., 427 U.S. 50 (1976)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MCKINNEY v. ALABAMA, 424 U.S. 669 (1976)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
DORAN v. SALEM INN, INC., et al., 422 U.S. 922 (1975)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Sexual Material
ERZNOZNIK v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, 422 U.S. 205 (1975)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
SOUTHEASTERN PROMOTIONS, LTD. v. CONRAD et al., 420 U.S. 546 (1975)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
JENKINS v. GEORGIA, 418 U.S. 153 (1974)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
HAMLING et al. v. UNITED STATES, 418 U.S. 87 (1974)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
ROADEN v. KENTUCKY, 413 U.S. 496 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Search & Seizure
ALEXANDER et al. v. VIRGINIA, 413 U.S. 836 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
MILLER v. CALIFORNIA, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
PARIS ADULT THEATRE I et al. v. SLATON, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, et al., 413 U.S. 49 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
KAPLAN v. CALIFORNIA, 413 U.S. 115 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
UNITED STATES v. 12 200-FT. REELS OF SUPER 8MM. FILM et al. (PALADINI, CLAIMANT), 413 U.S. 123 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
UNITED STATES v. ORITO, 413 U.S. 139 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
PAPISH v. BOARD OF CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI et al., 410 U.S. 667 (1973)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CALIFORNIA et al. v. LARUE et al., 409 U.S. 109 (1972)
- Lower Court Ruling:
- Overruled (in part)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
RABE v. WASHINGTON, 405 U.S. 313 (1972)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
UNITED STATES v. THIRTY-SEVEN (37) PHOTOGRAPHS (LUROS, CLAIMANT), 402 U.S. 363 (1971)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
UNITED STATES v. REIDEL, 402 U.S. 351 (1971)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
GROVE PRESS, INC., et al. v. MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF CENSORS, 401 U.S. 480 (1971)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
BLOUNT, POSTMASTER GENERAL, et al. v. RIZZI, DBA THE MAIL BOX, 400 U.S. 410 (1971)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
HOYT et al. v. MINNESOTA, 399 U.S. 524 (1970)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
BLOSS et al. v. DYKEMA, 398 U.S. 278 (1970)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
ROWAN, DBA AMERICAN BOOK SERVICE, et al. v. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT et al., 397 U.S. 728 (1970)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CAIN et al. v. KENTUCKY, 397 U.S. 319 (1970)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
STANLEY v. GEORGIA, 394 U.S. 557 (1969)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
RABECK v. NEW YORK, 391 U.S. 462 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
INTERSTATE CIRCUIT, INC., et al. v. CITY OF DALLAS, 391 U.S. 53 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
GINSBERG v. NEW YORK, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
INTERSTATE CIRCUIT, INC. v. CITY OF DALLAS, 390 U.S. 676 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
FELTON et al. v. CITY OF PENSACOLA, 390 U.S. 340 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
I.M. AMUSEMENT CORP. v. OHIO., 389 U.S. 573 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
ROBERT-ARTHUR MANAGEMENT CORP. v. TENNESSEE ex rel. CANALE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY GENERAL, 389 U.S. 578 (1968)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CHANCE v. CALIFORNIA, 389 U.S. 89 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CENTRAL MAGAZINE SALES, LTD. v. UNITED STATES, 389 U.S. 50 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
POTOMAC NEWS CO. v. UNITED STATES, 389 U.S. 47 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CONNER v. CITY OF HAMMOND, 389 U.S. 48 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
ADAY et al. v. UNITED STATES, 388 U.S. 447 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
BOOKS, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 388 U.S. 449 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
FRIEDMAN v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 441 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
RATNER et al. v. CALIFORNIA, 388 U.S. 442 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
SHEPERD et al. v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 444 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
AVANSINO et al. v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 446 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
CORINTH PUBLICATIONS, INC. v. WESBERRY et al., 388 U.S. 448 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
ROSENBLOOM v. VIRGINIA, 388 U.S. 450 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
A QUANTITY OF COPIES OF BOOKS et al. v. KANSAS, 388 U.S. 452 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
SCHACKMAN et al. v. CALIFORNIA, 388 U.S. 454 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
REDRUP v. NEW YORK, 386 U.S. 767 (1967)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
REDMOND et ux. v. UNITED STATES, 384 U.S. 264 (1966)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
A BOOK NAMED ‘JOHN CLELAND’S MEMOIRS OF A WOMAN OF PLEASURE’ et al. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MASSACHUSETTS, 383 U.S. 413 (1966)
- Lower Court Ruling:
- Overruled
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MISHKIN v. NEW YORK, 383 U.S. 502 (1966)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
GINZBURG et al. v. UNITED STATES, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
STANFORD v. TEXAS, 379 U.S. 476 (1965)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Search & Seizure
JACOBELLIS v. OHIO, 378 U.S. 184 (1964)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
GROVE PRESS, INC., v. GERSTEIN, STATE ATTORNEY, et al., 378 U.S. 577 (1964)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
TRALINS v. GERSTEIN, STATE ATTORNEY, 378 U.S. 576 (1964)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
BANTAM BOOKS, INC., et al. v. SULLIVAN et al., 372 U.S. 58 (1963)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MANUAL ENTERPRISES, INC., et al. v. DAY, POSTMASTER GENERAL, 370 U.S. 478 (1962)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
SMITH v. CALIFORNIA, 361 U.S. 147 (1959)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
KINGSLEY INTERNATIONAL PICTURES CORP. v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, 360 U.S. 684 (1959)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
KINGSLEY BOOKS, INC., et al. v. BROWN, CORPORATION COUNSEL, 354 U.S. 436 (1957)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
ROTH v. UNITED STATES, 354 U.S. 476 (1957)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
BUTLER v. MICHIGAN, 352 U.S. 380 (1957)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
SUPERIOR FILMS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF OHIO, DIVISION OF FILM CENSORSHIP, HISSONG, SUPERINTENDENT, 346 U.S. 587 (1954)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
UNITED STATES v. ALPERS, 338 U.S. 680 (1950)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
WINTERS v. NEW YORK, 333 U.S. 507 (1948)
- Related Sub-Topics:
- Obscenity, Sexual Material
MUTUAL FILM CORPORATIONN v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO, 236 U.S. 230 (1915)
- Lower Court Ruling:
- Overruled
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
FOX v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, 236 U.S. 273 (1915)
- Related Sub-Topic:
- Obscenity
Topics: Freedom of Speech & Expression, Obscenity, Search & Seizure, Sexual Material
Cite this page: APA Bluebook Chicago MLA
This library is a work in progress. See an error on this page? Let us know.
Follow FIRE