Legal Opinion

City of Columbus v. Fraley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1975No. Nos. 74-125 and 74-177PublishedCited by 92 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPaul W. Beoww, J.

I

Appellants were convicted for the alleged nse of obscene language on a public street. Upon appeal, both convictions were affirmed, on the theory that the words in question were “fighting words.” We reverse.

Section 2327.01 of the Columbus Code of Ordinances provides that:

“No person shall disturb the good order and quiet of the city by * * # using obscene or profane language in any' street or other public place * *

In applying such statutory proscription, appellants could properly be convicted only if the language they used was legally obscene. Clearly, such was not the case.

In Cohen v.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Cohen v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Cole v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Hess v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

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

3Cited by92 opinions

  1. Clifford Cummings, Jr. v. City of Akron Rodney Sherman and Howard Vaughn, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  2. State v. BishopIdaho Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Jeffrey Swiecicki v. Jose DelgadoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
  4. State v. HattonArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Elson v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1983

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

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

Powered by the Exa API