Legal Opinion

Cincinnati City v. King

Hamilton County Municipal Court

Decided April 13, 1960No. 17852PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By KEEFE, J.

On November 27, 1959, a jury' found the- defendant guilty of violating Section 901 13 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Cincinnati. The section is entitled “Indecent Publications,” and provides as follows:

“Whoever shall print, engrave, sell, offer for sale, give away, exhibit or publish, or exhibit as for sale or other purpose, or have in his possession or under his control, any obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, or immodest book, pamphlet, paper, picture, image, cast statuary, drawing or representation, or any other article of an indecedent or immoral nature, or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Frost v. Corporation Comm'n of Okla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. Davis v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. State ex rel. Michaels v. MorseOhio Court of Appeals · 1956
  4. Ohio National Bank v. BooneOhio Court of Appeals · 1941

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. HoytSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API