Facts
- Murray Kaplan owned an adult bookstore in Los Angeles, California.
- An undercover officer entered the store after citizen complaints and asked for “good sexy books.”
- Kaplan recommended and sold the officer a plain-covered, unillustrated paperback titled Suite 69 and read aloud a sample paragraph.
- The book’s content consisted of repeated, explicit descriptions of sexual conduct.
- California prosecuted Kaplan for selling obscene material under a state obscenity statute.
- At trial, the allegedly obscene book was admitted into evidence; the prosecution did not present expert testimony on whether the book lacked social value.
- The trial court applied contemporary community standards of the State of California and convicted Kaplan.
- A California appellate court affirmed the conviction; the U.S. Supreme Court granted review.
Issues
- Whether expression by words alone, in an unillustrated book, can be legally obscene and therefore outside First Amendment protection.
- Whether a statewide community standard (California) is constitutionally adequate for judging obscenity, or whether a national standard is required.
- Whether the Constitution requires the prosecution to present expert testimony or other ancillary evidence to prove obscenity when the material is in evidence.
Decision
- The Supreme Court vacated the state appellate judgment and remanded for reconsideration under the obscenity standards announced in Miller v. California.
- The Court held that a book may be obscene even if it contains no pictures; text-only sexual expression is not protected if it meets the obscenity test.
- The Court held that applying contemporary community standards of the State of California was constitutionally permissible.
- The Court held that expert testimony is not constitutionally required when the allegedly obscene material itself is placed in evidence for the factfinder to evaluate.
Legal Principles
- Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, and the analysis does not turn on the medium; words alone can be obscene.
- States may regulate the commercial sale and distribution of obscene materials, including sales to consenting adults, based on reasonable legislative judgments about harmful effects.
- Contemporary statewide community standards may be used in determining whether material appeals to prurient interest and is patently offensive.
- When the material is in evidence, the Constitution does not require expert testimony to establish obscenity, though parties may offer it.
Conclusion
The Court ruled that an unillustrated book can be obscene and unprotected, that statewide community standards and lay evaluation of the material can suffice, and it vacated and remanded for application of the constitutional obscenity framework announced in Miller.