Legal Opinion
State v. Marshall
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided May 17, 1993PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DROWOTA, Justice.
Permission to appeal has been granted to the Defendants-Appellants, Dudley W. Marshall and Carolyn A. Swanson, for the limited purpose of determining whether the statutes pursuant to which the Defendants were convicted of possession with intent to distribute obscene material (T.C.A. §§ 39-6-1101(5) and 39-6-1104(a)) violate Article I, Section 19 of the Tennessee Constitution.
The Defendants, who were employed as retail clerks in a bookstore called Paris Adult Theater in Memphis, were arrested on July 28, 1987 for their roles in selling a video cassette tape entitled…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Miller v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1979
- Leech v. American Booksellers Ass'n, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. PendergrassCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1999
- Davis-Kidd Booksellers, Inc. v. McWherterTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
- Whittington v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1996
- State Ex Rel. Commissioner of Transportation v. Medicine Bird Black Bear White EagleCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2001
- American Bush v. City of South Salt LakeUtah Supreme Court · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.