Kuhns v. California
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
Dissent
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Mr. Justice Brennan, with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Marshall join, dissenting.
The California courts, in response to our remand for reconsideration in light of Miller v. California, 413 U. S. 15 (1973), reaffirmed petitioners’ 1971 convictions for selling obscene materials in violation of Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 311.2 (West 1970). I would reverse the convictions. I adhere to my view expressed in Miller that this statute is “unconstitutionally overbroad, and therefore invalid on its face.” 413 U. S., at 47 (dissenting opinion). See also Splawn v. California, ante, p. 595 (Brennan, J., dissenting); Pendleton v. California, 423 U. S. 1068 (1976) (Brennan, J., dissenting from dismissal of appeal); Sandquist v. California, 423 U. S. 900, 901 (1975) (Brennan, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari); Tobalina v. California, 419 U. S. 926 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari); Kaplan v. California, 419 U. S. 915 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari); Blank v. California, 419 U. S. 913 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari).
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.