People v. Huffman
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBandstra, J.
Defendant produced and arranged for the cable transmission of a television show featuring exposed genitalia. In this appeal, he seeks to have his conviction under Michigan’s open or indecent exposure statute overturned primarily because of his arguments that the statute does not apply to television programming and that, if it does, he cannot be convicted under First Amendment principles. We conclude, both because the statute includes no limitation that would prevent its application to television exposures and because such exposures can be more offensive than a more traditional public…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- City of Erie v. Pap's A. M.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. BlevinsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
- Carroll v. JacksonDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2021
- Millay v. ChapmanDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2022
- People of Michigan v. Aaron James MillerMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019
- People of Michigan v. Adam Louis BrownMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.