CAREY

v.

ELROD ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• Blannie Mae Spears v. State, 337 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1976)
  …nsive, that is protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.” Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518, 92 S.Ct. 1103, 31 L.Ed.2d 408 (1972) (emphasis supplied); Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105, 94 S.Ct. 326, 38 L.Ed.2d 303 (1973); Rosenfeld v. New Jersey, 408 U.S. 901, 92 S.Ct. 2479, 33 L.Ed.2d 321 (1972); Coates v. City of Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611, 91 S.Ct. 1686, 29 L.Ed.2d 214 (1971); Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 69 S.Ct. 894, 93 L.Ed. 1131 (1949). Statutes regulating speech must “punish only unprotect…
• Canney v. State, 298 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
  …n of the majority, but in my view it is clearly and directly contrary to Gooding v. Wilson, 1972, 405 U.S. 518, 92 S.Ct. 1103, 31 L.Ed.2d 408; Lewis v. New Orleans, 1972, 408 U.S. 913, 92 S.Ct. 2499, 33 L.Ed.2d 321 and Rosenfeld v. New Jersey, 1972, 408 U.S. 901, 92 S.Ct. 2484, 33 L.Ed.2d 321, possibly through inadvertence. The central question which is involved in Jones was not touched upon by the majority opinion in that case. Our Supreme Court treated only the question of overbreadth and, finding that th…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville, 422 U.S. 205 (U.S. 1975)
  …(1952) (Douglas, J., dissenting). It has also been suggested that government may proscribe, by a properly framed law, “the willful use of scurrilous language calculated to offend the sensibilities of an unwilling audience.” Rosenfeld v. New Jersey, 408 U. S. 901, 905 (1972) (Powell, J., dissenting). Cf. Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U. S. 463 (1966). In such cases the speaker may seek to “force public confrontation with the potentially offensive aspects' of the work.” Id., at 470. It may not be the content…