Legal Opinion
People v. Larsen
Criminal Court of the City of New York
Decided July 30, 2010PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Michael Gerstein, J.
We are asked to determine whether topical novelty condoms should be deemed expressive items similar to other First Amendment protected items for purposes of exempting vendors of those items from New York City’s general vendor licensing statute, Administrative Code of the City of New York § 20-453. Our decision requires analysis of First Amendment jurisprudence, as well as analysis of the statute upon which the charge is based and the items sold by defendants.
Defendants1 are each charged with violating section 20-453, for allegedly displaying and…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Citizens United v. Federal Election CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. AndujarCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2011
- People v. AndujarAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2016
- People v. Andujar (Jose)Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2016