Freedman v. Maryland case brief summary
380 U.S. 51 (1965)
CASE FACTS
Defendant wished to challenge the constitutionality of a state censorship statute that required submission of all motion pictures to the Board prior to their exhibition. He exhibited a film without first submitting it to the Board and was subsequently convicted of violating the statute, Md. Code Ann. art. 66A, § 2 (1957). The judgment of the trial court was affirmed, and on appeal of that decision the reviewing court ruled in favor of defendant.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
Defendant's conviction for violation of a statute censorship statute was reversed.
Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Constitutional Law
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tyawX_W9YFOY5d6QozSc9J5RCVBJvoCIyvFl3JM59Aw7Te0Hj9NPDqGTUDhGgE_cXenz1OhLyTgr-7w8PCW9YFv7fwLLeaeohVq25-mf85P8oUgAFMHJtBlmzHhacL64tP-bFENbVlciUsGB7DzLcMm2bAmaFyZdaF_KQyX5beeT2XZhAXskAbnTsPKZwxhN967zhSbSy_HhVozwI7cKfDrXwzPX0Wn2R_DTLDDOUqzjSxhVnBZViddZ1W_nHOzBc_daAVXVgKnp6h=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sD6dwz_MQQfXfmFd88eoMz1FscOhhblVzbtpIYqcIiAl66rJJci3mnmKj2gcg8dJ2St4fp6ANPXQjgvTQJZBAdtE6UciaFhWrlvOQ-40oiYlO0yUnlSVpw9iMsvHYKLbivV0ZTG4P5OIympfxbk1x843nLD_viLo6ha5-eJq-zoLnSB0T60qxNguDgZ9XX9333drA6GiwrQejspx7sLctVJju5wj2Q_ZA354xjv4mOcjr39saAsL8WSwBDF7oZDO6peFFtO8jYM-U=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tX5mhWnr4mHxg3f9Xhk5-J5_pcE0H6STFEfzmp7dN3UIaCZhuivgpFXCBhocbFnWwugKBb5FmV0cZkjuMkCCb86cHd5WzbYtoblmwk9vuIYzmx33nHgfZDF460ruXpmhg1Y8-9PrG9Cgm5rzahQcBPIE3TXEZkACYKKHx7bUlnrvQ4UxiXeiL1GnDsoF9aFtLtad2jGGffIEe6daJ_G5lvMXsLi8dmiioX1qQmDmFI7_V7XpvLU846R4yzYzhtJu11Q0LU_TZttu7B=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tiQsCemt9UxsbhXCWioprG7O6B1LZ8K8-lR-jTJpES4WcX0fDJ3v_1jp6TtNUJX5R7shC9GgLbiQMVBplogeidrF0BzWaHENfhl6L8FapEr_ExWxUxKBPN_sSJcXRpy77gAnW73I3C6m7TKf_OnU1iegKFWWq1S-e84enCSGprRZxsAUP9F9HJu8i53ZfnvNC7-hhnVi6Yy8wr_5yk_2bJ0mnEw4m8t997MidpYzsvAVtcicOkH8LVBS0St_oHx-_DJIi-xblIW6jV=s0-d)
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
380 U.S. 51 (1965)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed from a judgment of
the Court of Appeals of Maryland, which affirmed his conviction for
exhibiting a motion picture at his theatre without first submitting
the picture to the State Board of Censors (Board) as required by Md.
Code Ann. art. 66A, § 2 (1957).CASE FACTS
Defendant wished to challenge the constitutionality of a state censorship statute that required submission of all motion pictures to the Board prior to their exhibition. He exhibited a film without first submitting it to the Board and was subsequently convicted of violating the statute, Md. Code Ann. art. 66A, § 2 (1957). The judgment of the trial court was affirmed, and on appeal of that decision the reviewing court ruled in favor of defendant.
DISCUSSION
- The Court held that defendant's refusal to submit the film to the Board in violation only of § 2 did not restrict defendant to an attack on that section alone.
- The Court found validity in defendant's contention that § 2 effected an invalid prior restraint on the freedom of speech because the structure of the other provisions of the statute contributed to the infirmity of § 2, and that he did not assert that the other provisions were independently invalid.
- The Court found that the statute lacked sufficient safeguards against undue inhibition of protected expression, and that rendered the § 2 requirement of prior submission of films to the Board an invalid previous restraint in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
CONCLUSION
Defendant's conviction for violation of a statute censorship statute was reversed.
Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Constitutional Law
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
No comments:
Post a Comment