People v. Hartman

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Hartman

244 N.E.2d 710, 23 N.Y.2d 778, 297 N.Y.S.2d 143, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 931

DecidedDecember 12, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 244 N.E.2d 710 (People v. Hartman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Hartman, 244 N.E.2d 710, 23 N.Y.2d 778, 297 N.Y.S.2d 143, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 931 (N.Y. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. The judgment should be affirmed. The statute (former Penal Law, § 484-h) deals with the knowing sale of obscene material to minors and defines “ knowingly ” as having “ reason to know ” the character and content of material susceptible of examination by defendant (subd. 1, par. [g], cl. [i]). The lurid cover of the magazine “ French Follies ”, the notation “ Adults Only ”, and the price of $1.50 would give ground to find defendant had reason to know the “ character ” of the magazine sold to a 13-year-old boy. Although defendant testified the magazine was “ rolled up ” and in the boy’s hand when she sold it and she did not look at it, there is proof by the boy which could be credited that defendant looked at the book and also “ looked at the price ” when she sold it. Defendant’s husband owns the store and has been in business for seven years. She works there regularly. The constitutionality of [780]*780the statute has been upheld (Bookcase, Inc. v. Broderick, 18 N Y 2d 71; Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U. S. 629).

Chief Judge Ftjld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Bkeitel and Jasen concur.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Memorandum. The judgment should be affirmed. The statute (former Penal Law, § 484-h) deals with the knowing sale of obscene material to minors and defines “ knowingly ” as having “ reason to know ” the character and content of material susceptible of examination by defendant (subd. 1, par. [g], cl. [i]). The lurid cover of the magazine “ French Follies ”, the notation “ Adults Only ”, and the price of $1.50 would give ground to find defendant had reason to know the “ character ” of the magazine sold to a 13-year-old boy. Although defendant testified the magazine was “ rolled up ” and in the boy’s hand when she sold it and she did not look at it, there is proof by the boy which could be credited that defendant looked at the book and also “ looked at the price ” when she sold it. Defendant’s husband owns the store and has been in business for seven years. She works there regularly. The constitutionality of [780]*780the statute has been upheld (Bookcase, Inc. v. Broderick, 18 N Y 2d 71; Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U. S. 629).

Chief Judge Ftjld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Bkeitel and Jasen concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 N.E.2d 710, 23 N.Y.2d 778, 297 N.Y.S.2d 143, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 931, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hartman-ny-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack