From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lou Bern Broadway, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 4, 1973
299 N.E.2d 256 (N.Y. 1973)

Opinion

Argued March 19, 1973

Decided May 4, 1973

Appeal from the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, IRVING LANG, J.

O. John Rogge and Richard H. Rosenberg for appellants.

Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Michael R. Juviler and Arthur Weinstein of counsel), for respondent.

Roger Bennet Adler for New York State District Attorneys Association, amicus curiae.


Order reversed and the information dismissed in the following memorandum: Assuming, without deciding, the power of the State to regulate public displays short of obscenity, we conclude that the displays in this case, as a matter of law, do not fall within the proscription of the statute. We, therefore, do not reach the constitutional question.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, BREITEL, JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES and WACHTLER.


Summaries of

People v. Lou Bern Broadway, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 4, 1973
299 N.E.2d 256 (N.Y. 1973)
Case details for

People v. Lou Bern Broadway, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LOU BERN BROADWAY…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 4, 1973

Citations

299 N.E.2d 256 (N.Y. 1973)
299 N.E.2d 256
345 N.Y.S.2d 1012

Citing Cases

People v. Oshry

If this statute is viewed as a public display restriction on sexually explicit nonobscene material it need…

Calderon v. City of Buffalo

See, e.g., People v Bookcase (supra) and Rabeck v New York ( 391 U.S. 462); People v Tannenbaum ( 18 N.Y.2d…