Legal Opinion
United States v. P.H.E., Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 26, 1992No. 91-4149PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALDISERT, Circuit Judge.
The First Amendment bars a criminal prosecution where the proceeding is motivated by the improper purpose of interfering with the defendant’s constitutionally protected speech. Bantam Books v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 83 S.Ct. 631, 9 L.Ed.2d 584 (1963); Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 14 L.Ed.2d 22 (1975). This appeal by defendants who unsuccessfully moved to dismiss an indictment charging violations of federal obscenity law presents that issue for our consideration.
Jurisdiction was proper in the trial court based on 18 U.S.C. § 1461 (criminalizing…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Phelps v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997
- Fred W. Phelps, Sr. And Edward F. Engel v. Joan Hamilton, in Her Official Capacity as District AttorneyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
- Olcott v. Delaware Flood Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
- Poole v. County of OteroCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. WellsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.