State v. Andrews

This is an appeal from a conviction on each of two counts for the violation of Connecticut’s antiobscenity statute. General Statutes § 53-243 1 The defendant raises three basic claims: (1) § 53-243 is unconstitutional for lack of any explicit scienter requirement; (2) there was no evidence of scienter on his part; and (3) the magazines for the possession of which he has been convicted were not obscene.

In June, 1960, the defendant, Andrews, in part nership with William C. Smith, conducted a news store in the city of Meriden, where they sold magazines, candies and cigarettes. Customers were…