Legal Opinion
State v. Bartanen
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided January 30, 1979No. 4355PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMERON, Chief Justice.
Defendant Erland Earl Bartanen was convicted by a jury and adjudged guilty in the Superior Court of Maricopa County of five counts of commercial exhibition of obscene films in violation of A.R.S. § 13-532. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 47(e)(5), Rules of the Supreme Court, 17A A.R.S.
Defendant raises the following questions on appeal:
1. Was the search warrant’s description of the items to be seized sufficiently particular to withstand a motion to suppress?
2. Did the affidavit and the warrant fail to establish probable cause to believe that the films were obscene?
3…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. Di ReSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Stanford v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- A Book Named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure" v. Attorney General of MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Ripplinger v. CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Polykoff v. CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Ripplinger v. CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- State v. ReganWashington Supreme Court · 1982
- Polykoff v. CollinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.