DOUBLEDAY & CO., INC.

v.

NEW YORK

Citator

Cited By

• Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (U.S. 1957)
  …S. App. D. C. 188, 195 F. 2d 764. Hart, The Relations Between State and Federal Law, 54 Col. L. Rev. 489, 493. To give only a few examples: Edmund Wilson’s “Memoirs of Hecate County” was found obscene in New York, see Doubleday & Co. v. New York, 335 U. S. 848; a bookseller indicted for selling the same book was acquitted in California. “God’s Little Acre” was held to be obscene in Massachusetts, not obscene in New York and Pennsylvania. While the correctness of the judge’s charge is not before us, the q…
• Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115 (U.S. 1973)
  …t to Suite 69. But most of the Mishkin books, if not all, were illustrated. See id., at 505, 514-515. Prior to Roth, this Court affirmed, by an equally divided Court, a conviction for sale of an unillustrated book. Doubleday & Co., Inc. v. New York, 335 U. S. 848 (1948). This Court has always rigorously scrutinized judgments involving books for possible violation of First Amendment rights, and has regularly reversed convictions on that basis. See Childs v. Oregon, 401 U. S. 1006 (1971); Walker v. Ohio, 398…
• United States v. Roth, 237 F.2d 796 (2d Cir. 1956)
  …inciting violent and depraved crimes. The Court said in passing, 333 U.S. at page 510, 68 S.Ct. at page 667, that legislation subjecting obscéne publications to governmental control is valid. In Doubleday & Co. v. People of State of New York, 1948, 335 U.S. 848, 69 S.Ct. 79, 93 L.Ed. 398, the Court, by an evenly divided vote, without opinion affirmed a state court decision sustaining a state obscenity statute. In United States v. Alpers, 1950, 338 U.S. 680, 70 S.Ct. 352, 94 L.Ed. 457, the Court construed…

  ← 1 / 2 →