ROTH v. NEW JERSEY, 414 U.S. 962 (1973)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
ROTH v. NEW JERSEY , 414 U.S. 962 (1973)414 U.S. 962
Raymond ROTH
v.
State of NEW JERSEY.
No. 72-1524.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 23, 1973
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Petition for writ of certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, for further consideration in light of Miller v. California,
413 U.S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115 (1973); United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Super 8 mm. Film, 413 U.S. 123 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139 (1973); Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483 (1973); Roaden v. Kentucky, 413 U.S. 496 (1973); and Alexander v. Virginia, 413 U.S. 836, 93 S. Ct. 2803 (1973).
Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting.
Petitioner was convicted on charges of possession and sale of allegedly obscene and indecent publications in violation of New Jersey Statutes 2A:115-2, which provides as follows:
'Any person who, without just cause,
utters or exposes to the view or hearing of another, or possesses
with intent to utter or expose to the view or hearing of another,
any obscene or indecent book publication, pamphlet, picture, or any
mechanical or electronic recording on a record, tape, wire or other
device, or other representation however made or any person who
shall sell, import, print, publish, loan, give away, or distribute
or possess with intent to sell, print, publish, loan, give away,
design, prepare, distribute, or offer for sale any obscene or
indecent book, publication, pamphlet, picture or other
representation, however made, or who in any way advertises the
same, or in any manner, whether by recommendation against its use
or otherwise, gives any information how or where any of the same
may be [414 U.S. 962
, 964]
Opinions
v.
State of NEW JERSEY.
No. 72-1524. Supreme Court of the United States October 23, 1973 On petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Petition for writ of certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, for further consideration in light of Miller v. California, Page 414 U.S. 962 , 963 413 U.S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115 (1973); United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Super 8 mm. Film, 413 U.S. 123 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139 (1973); Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483 (1973); Roaden v. Kentucky, 413 U.S. 496 (1973); and Alexander v. Virginia, 413 U.S. 836, 93 S. Ct. 2803 (1973). Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting. Petitioner was convicted on charges of possession and sale of allegedly obscene and indecent publications in violation of New Jersey Statutes 2A:115-2, which provides as follows:
U.S. Supreme Court
ROTH v. NEW JERSEY , 414 U.S. 962 (1973) 414 U.S. 962 Raymond ROTHv.
State of NEW JERSEY.
No. 72-1524. Supreme Court of the United States October 23, 1973 On petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Petition for writ of certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, for further consideration in light of Miller v. California, Page 414 U.S. 962 , 963 413 U.S. 15 (1973); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973); Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115 (1973); United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Super 8 mm. Film, 413 U.S. 123 (1973); United States v. Orito, 413 U.S. 139 (1973); Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483 (1973); Roaden v. Kentucky, 413 U.S. 496 (1973); and Alexander v. Virginia, 413 U.S. 836, 93 S. Ct. 2803 (1973). Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting. Petitioner was convicted on charges of possession and sale of allegedly obscene and indecent publications in violation of New Jersey Statutes 2A:115-2, which provides as follows:
'Any person who, without just cause,
utters or exposes to the view or hearing of another, or possesses
with intent to utter or expose to the view or hearing of another,
any obscene or indecent book publication, pamphlet, picture, or any
mechanical or electronic recording on a record, tape, wire or other
device, or other representation however made or any person who
shall sell, import, print, publish, loan, give away, or distribute
or possess with intent to sell, print, publish, loan, give away,
design, prepare, distribute, or offer for sale any obscene or
indecent book, publication, pamphlet, picture or other
representation, however made, or who in any way advertises the
same, or in any manner, whether by recommendation against its use
or otherwise, gives any information how or where any of the same
may be
Page 414 U.S.
962 , 964
had, seen, heard, bought or sold, is guilty of a
misdemeanor.'
It is my view that, 'at least in the absence of distribution to
juveniles or obtrusive exposure to unconsenting adults, the First
and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the state and federal
governments from attempting wholly to suppress sexually oriented
materials on the basis of their allegedly 'obscene' contents.'
Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S.
49, 113 (1973) (dissenting opinion). It is clear that, tested
by that constitutional standard, N.J.Stat. 2A:115- 2 is
constitutionally overbroad and therefore invalid on its face. For
the reasons stated in my dissent in Miller v. California, 413 U.S.
15, 47 (1973), I would therefore grant certiorari, vacate the
judgment of the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New
Jersey, remand for further proceedings not inconsistent with my
Paris Adult dissent. In that circumstance, I have no occasion to
consider whether the other questions presented merit plenary
review. See Heller v. New York, 413 U.S.
483, 494 (1973).
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, being of the view that state obscenity
regulation is prohibited by the Fourteenth and First Amendments
(see Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S.
49, 70 ( Douglas, J., dissenting)), would grant certiorari in
each of these cases and reverse the judgments of conviction.
Search This Case
