Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1974

People v. Mature Enterprises, Inc.

People v. Mature Enterprises, Inc.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided January 14, 1974
76 Misc. 2d 660; 352 N.Y.S.2d 346; 1974 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1997

Counsel

Kassner <& Detsky (Herbert S. Kassner of counsel), for appellant. Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney (Lewis R. Friedman and Arthur Weinstein of counsel), for respondent.

People v. Mature Enterprises, Inc.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the film, Deep Throat ”, we find it constitutionally obscene under both the statutory and decisional guidelines (Penal Law, § 235.00; Miller v. California, 413 U. S. 15; Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U. S. 49; Peo*661ple v. Heller, 29 N Y 2d 319, upon rearg. 33 N Y 2d 314; Redlich v. Capri Cinema, 43 A D 2d 27, 29).

Since defendant is a corporation, ‘ ‘ the only penal sanction that can be used is a fine ” (Preiser, Practice Commentary, McKinney’s Cons. Laws, Book 39, p. 166); a fine is the sole penalty (Penal Law, § 80.10). Hence, defendant was not entitled to trial by jury (Rankin v. Shanker, 23 N Y 2d 111, 120; Mature Enterprises v. Hogan, N. Y. L. J., Nov. 16, 1972, p. 2, col. 1). In the fact pattern before us, we conclude that the fine imposed was not excessive (Rankin v. Shanker, supra; People v. Gittelson, 18 N Y 2d 427, 431, affg. 25 A D 2d 265).

The judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Concur — Markowitz, P. J., Fine and Frank, JJ.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.