Andrews v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
TEAGUE, Judge.
ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
The Legislature has made certain activities in obscenity the subject of criminal liability, and, with the exception of private possession for personal use, Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557, 89 S.Ct. 1243, 22 L.Ed.2d 542 (1969), the Federal constitution does not immunize those properly convicted from the sanctions imposed. *373Bryers v. State, 480 S.W.2d 712, 716 (Tex.Cr.App.1972).
William Andrews, appellant, was accused by complaint and information with promoting obscenity by selling an obscene magazine, which was entitled “Swedish Erotica…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Stanley v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- Middleton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2003
- Vernon v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Hathorn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Willis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- Stone v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.