Kaplan v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Kaplan v. United States

311 A.2d 506, 1973 D.C. App. LEXIS 390

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 21, 1973

Docket5452

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 311 A.2d 506 (Kaplan v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kaplan v. United States, 311 A.2d 506, 1973 D.C. App. LEXIS 390 (D.C. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment this court had entered in this case on May 10, 1971, in an opinion reported at 277 A.2d 477, which had affirmed appellant’s conviction for presenting an obscene film in a “peep-show” machine, and remanded the case for our further consideration in light of its recent decisions dealing with obscenity. See — U.S. —, 93 S.Ct. 3030, 37 L.Ed.2d 1022 (1973).

After reviewing the record and briefs filed at the time of the argument and considering the supplemental memoranda we permitted the parties to file after the Supreme Court’s mandate to us and the decisions cited in such mandate we reinstate our judgment affirming appellant’s conviction for violation of D.C.Code 1973, § 22-2001 and reaffirm our prior opinion.

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment this court had entered in this case on May 10, 1971, in an opinion reported at 277 A.2d 477, which had affirmed appellant’s conviction for presenting an obscene film in a “peep-show” machine, and remanded the case for our further consideration in light of its recent decisions dealing with obscenity. See — U.S. —, 93 S.Ct. 3030, 37 L.Ed.2d 1022 (1973).

After reviewing the record and briefs filed at the time of the argument and considering the supplemental memoranda we permitted the parties to file after the Supreme Court’s mandate to us and the decisions cited in such mandate we reinstate our judgment affirming appellant’s conviction for violation of D.C.Code 1973, § 22-2001 and reaffirm our prior opinion.

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

311 A.2d 506, 1973 D.C. App. LEXIS 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaplan-v-united-states-dc-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack