CARGAL v. GEORGIA, 438 U.S. 906 (1978)
U.S. Supreme Court
CARGAL v. GEORGIA , 438 U.S. 906 (1978)
438 U.S. 906
Bobby L. CARGAL
v.
State of GEORGIA
No. 77-1426
Supreme Court of the United States
June 26, 1978
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting.
Petitioner, convicted of distributing obscene materials under Ga.Code 26-2101 (1975), asks this Court to decide the question:
"Whether jury instructions on scienter allowing a finding of 'constructive knowledge' in an obscenity case are sufficient to meet . . . constitutional minimum standards . . . ?" Pet. for Cert. 2.
In Bal ew v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 223 ( 1978), we granted certio-
rari to consider, but did not reach, precisely this issue. See Pet. for Cert. in Ballew v. Georgia, O.T.1977, No. 76-761, p. 2. I see no reason to suppose that this issue is any less worthy of consideration on certiorari now than it was when we accepted it in Ballew. For this reason, I would grant certiorari. See also Sewell v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 982, 98 S. Ct. 1635 (1978) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting from dismissal of appeal); Teal v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 989 ( 1978); Robinson v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 989 ( 1978) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting from vacation of judgment and remand). Barring this, I would grant this petition and summarily reverse. See Ballew, supra, 435 U.S., at 246 (opinion of BRENNAN, J.); Sanders v. Georgia, 424 U.S. 931 (1976) ( dissent from denial of certiorari).
U.S. Supreme Court
CARGAL v. GEORGIA , 438 U.S. 906 (1978)
Bobby L. CARGAL
v.
State of GEORGIA
No. 77-1426
Supreme Court of the United States
June 26, 1978
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN, with whom Mr. Justice STEWART and Mr. Justice MARSHALL join, dissenting.
Petitioner, convicted of distributing obscene materials under Ga.Code 26-2101 (1975), asks this Court to decide the question:
"Whether jury instructions on scienter allowing a finding of 'constructive knowledge' in an obscenity case are sufficient to meet . . . constitutional minimum standards . . . ?" Pet. for Cert. 2.
In Bal ew v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 223 ( 1978), we granted certio-
Page 438 U.S. 906 , 907
rari to consider, but did not reach, precisely this issue. See Pet. for Cert. in Ballew v. Georgia, O.T.1977, No. 76-761, p. 2. I see no reason to suppose that this issue is any less worthy of consideration on certiorari now than it was when we accepted it in Ballew. For this reason, I would grant certiorari. See also Sewell v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 982, 98 S. Ct. 1635 (1978) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting from dismissal of appeal); Teal v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 989 ( 1978); Robinson v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 989 ( 1978) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting from vacation of judgment and remand). Barring this, I would grant this petition and summarily reverse. See Ballew, supra, 435 U.S., at 246 (opinion of BRENNAN, J.); Sanders v. Georgia, 424 U.S. 931 (1976) ( dissent from denial of certiorari).
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.
