Commonwealth v. Gude

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Gude

255 N.E.2d 599, 356 Mass. 738, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 919

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJanuary 19, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 255 N.E.2d 599 (Commonwealth v. Gude) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Gude, 255 N.E.2d 599, 356 Mass. 738, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 919 (Mass. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendants were convicted of violations of G. L. c. 272, § 28, in that they sold to persons under the age of eighteen years copies of a publication called “Avatar” containing material allegedly offensive under that statute. Its authors seem to take pride in the rediscovery of certain four letter words old in Chaucer’s day and widely but covertly employed until recently. We cannot say that their use violates the statute. Any lapse was not one of morals but rather one of manners. As to manners, we are not the arbiters. Certainly under Federal constitutional standards as currently defined, this rather sad publication is not obscene. The possibility that isolated segments of the publication may raise some question of statutory violation does not render the publication obnoxious to the statute. Commonwealth v. Isenstadt, 318 Mass. 543, 549. The judgments are reversed and the findings are set aside. Judgments are to be entered for the defendants.

So ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The defendants were convicted of violations of G. L. c. 272, § 28, in that they sold to persons under the age of eighteen years copies of a publication called “Avatar” containing material allegedly offensive under that statute. Its authors seem to take pride in the rediscovery of certain four letter words old in Chaucer’s day and widely but covertly employed until recently. We cannot say that their use violates the statute. Any lapse was not one of morals but rather one of manners. As to manners, we are not the arbiters. Certainly under Federal constitutional standards as currently defined, this rather sad publication is not obscene. The possibility that isolated segments of the publication may raise some question of statutory violation does not render the publication obnoxious to the statute. Commonwealth v. Isenstadt, 318 Mass. 543, 549. The judgments are reversed and the findings are set aside. Judgments are to be entered for the defendants.

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 N.E.2d 599, 356 Mass. 738, 1970 Mass. LEXIS 919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-gude-mass-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack