holding that "[p]hrases such as 'to cause any child to become delinquent,' [and] 'to induce, aid, or encourage any child' . . . [found in predecessor statute to § 12-15-13] cannot meet the strict standard of specificity required in a criminal statute affecting expression protected by the first amendment"
How later courts described this case
- holding that "[p]hrases such as 'to cause any child to become delinquent,' [and] 'to induce, aid, or encourage any child' . . . [found in predecessor statute to § 12-15-13] cannot meet the strict standard of specificity required in a criminal statute affecting expression protected by the first amendment"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JOHNSON, District Judge
(specially concurring):
I concur in the opinion and decree we are now entering in these cases. However, my concurrence in that part of the opinion on the question of whether an adversary hearing is necessary before seizure is with reservations. We are unanimous in our views that the seizures of the films by the Alabama authorities in each of the eases now before us was unconstitutional according to any known legal standards. By reason of this finding we order the films returned to the owners. Since we have held the seizures unconstitutional, in my opinion it is not necessary — or even appropriate — to undertake to render an advisory opinion (as the Court does on pages 812 and 813 of the opinion) outlining the possible procedures that may be followed in future instances when films are to be seized. My understanding of the holdings of the Supreme Court in Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 , 81 S.Ct. 1708 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1127 ; Lee Art Theatre, Inc. v. Virginia, 392 U.S. 636 , 88 S.Ct. 2103 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1313 ; Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 , 77 S.Ct. 1304 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1498 ; and Speiser v. Randall, 357 U.S. 513 , 78 S.Ct. 1332 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1460 , leads me to the conclusion that the advisory dictum of this Court’s opinion may be erroneous. However, since I do consider that part of this Court’s opinion gratuitous dictum, and with this clarification, I concur.