| Heller v. New York | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued Nov 14, 1972 Decided June 25, 1973 | |
| Full case name | Heller v. New York |
| Citations | 413 U.S. 483 (more) 93 S. Ct. 2789; 37 L. Ed. 2d 745; 1973 U.S. LEXIS 30 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Found guilty by New York City Criminal Court, upheld by New York Supreme Court and New York Court of Appeals |
| Subsequent | None |
| Holding | |
| 1. Where a film is seized for the bona fide purpose of preserving it as evidence in a criminal proceeding, and it is seized pursuant to a warrant issued after a determination of probable obscenity by a neutral magistrate, and following the seizure a prompt judicial determination of the obscenity issue in an adversary proceeding is available at the request of any interested party, the seizure is constitutionally permissible. On a showing to the trial court that other copies of the film are not available for exhibition, the court should permit the seized film to be copied so that exhibition can be continued pending judicial resolution of the obscenity issue in an adversary proceeding. Otherwise, the film must be returned. 2. The case is remanded to afford the state courts an opportunity to reconsider petitioner's substantive challenges in light of Miller v. California, ante, p. 413 U.S. 15, and Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, ante, p. 413 U.S. 49, which establish guidelines for the lawful state regulation of obscene material. P. 413 U.S. 494. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Burger, joined by White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist |
| Dissent | Douglas |
| Dissent | Brennan, joined by Stewart, Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV; N.Y.Penal Law § 235.05 | |
Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483 (1973), was a United States Supreme Court decision which upheld that states could make laws limiting the distribution of obscene material, provided that these laws were consistent with the Miller test for obscene material established by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).[1] Heller was initially convicted for showing a sexually explicit film in the movie theater which he owned, under New York Penal Law § 235.0 which stated that and individual “is guilty of obscenity when, knowing its content and character, he 1. Promotes, or possesses with intent to promote, any obscene material; or 2. Produces, presents or directs an obscene performance or participates in a portion thereof which is obscene or which contributes to its obscenity."[2]
Heller appealed this ruling to the supreme court, claiming that his first amendment rights had been violated due to the broad nature of New York's obscenity laws. The defendant also claimed that his 14th amendment rights had been violated due to the fact the film was seized prior to him receiving a hearing of any kind. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Heller in a 5–4 decision, with the majority decision delivered by Justice Burger.[3] The Court found the procedure by which the film was seized to be constitutional but ruled in favor of Heller in order to afford New York a chance to bring their obscenity laws in line with the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California]]. The dissenting opinions were written by Justices William O. Douglas and William J. Brennan Jr., the latter of which was joined by Justices Potter Stewart and Thurgood Marshall. These dissenting opinions argued that the obscenity laws that Heller was convicted under were themselves unconstitutional and thus the seizure of the film was unconstitutional. This case was one of several cases that the Burger court ruled on concerning obscenity laws in the early 1970s.
- ^ Miller v. California. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 28 February 2017. <https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1971/1971_70_73>
- ^ Heller v. New York, 413 U.S. 483, 485 (1973).
- ^ Heller v. New York. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 28 February 2017.