Home/Ohio Supreme Court/State v. Griffith

State v. Griffith

174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 553
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMay 29, 1963
DocketNo. 37805
StatusPublished

This text of 174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 553 (State v. Griffith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Griffith, 174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 553 (Ohio 1963).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Section 2905.40, Revised Code, purporting to impose an absolute criminal liability upon one who operates or permits another to operate on his premises a picture machine exhibiting proscribed pictures without reference to guilty knowledge (scienter) or guilty purpose (mens rea) on the part of the accused is unconstitutional. City of Cincinnati v. Marshall, 172 Ohio St., 280; Smith v. California, 361 U. S., 147; State v. Warth, 173 Ohio St., 15; State v. Jacobellis, 173 Ohio St., 22.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Smith v. California
361 U.S. 147 (Supreme Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
174 Ohio St. (N.S.) 553, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-griffith-ohio-1963.