Legal Opinion

People v. Howell

Buffalo City Court

Decided June 13, 1977PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarmelo A. Parlato, J.

Defendants herein have, after trial before this court without a jury, been found guilty as charged, i.e., each with having twice violated subdivision 1 of section 235.05 of the Penal Law promoting obscenity in the second degree. They now have moved, before sentence, pursuant to CPL 330.30 (subd 1) for a setting aside of the verdicts and dismissal of the informations herein, on the ground that said *723subdivision 1 of section 235.05 of the Penal Law is, in conjunction with subdivision 1 of section 235.15, unconstitutional.

The first question which arises is the procedural propriety of considering…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Stanley v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. People v. AbrahamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. People v. FirthNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
  5. Trio Distributor Corp. v. City of AlbanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1957

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. Capitol News, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. Next Door Cinema Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1978
  3. People v. Illardo, New York County Courts1978
  4. State v. Starr Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1979
  5. People v. MartinCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API