Central Magazine Sales, Ltd. v. United States
Cases that cite this one
66 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Vernon Walker Huffman v. United States, Dennis Eugene Pryba v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1972)
- State v. Cox (Wash. Ct. App. 1970)
- Grand Rapids City Attorney v. Bloss (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
- State v. Hoyt (Minn. 1970)
- United States v. 77 Cartons of Magazines (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1969)
- United States v. Robert J. Baranov (9th Cir. 1973)
- United States v. William Groner, D/B/A Lucky Distributors (5th Cir. 1972)
- People v. Bloss (Mich. 1972)
- State v. Carlson (Minn. 1972)
- Stroud v. State (Ind. 1971)
- Scuncio v. Columbus Theatre, Inc. (R.I. 1971)
- Meyer v. Austin (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 1970)
- City of Chicago v. Geraci (Ill. 1970)
- City of Chicago v. Geraci (Ill. 1970)
- People v. Billingsley (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
- G. P. Putnam's Sons v. Calissi (N.J. 1967)
- Commonwealth v. LaLONDE (Pa. 1972)
- State v. Hoelscher (Minn. 1972)
- State v. Amato (Wis. 1971)
- Evert v. State (Tex. Crim. App. 1978)
- Sovereign News Co. v. Falke (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1977)
- United States v. Carl Dennis Cutting and Barry Daniel Still (9th Cir. 1976)
- United States v. Cutting (9th Cir. 1976)
- People v. Berger (Colo. 1974)
- Cherokee News & Arcade, Inc. v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1973)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
CENTRAL MAGAZINE SALES, LTD.
v.
UNITED STATES.
Supreme Court of United States.
Richard Lipsitz for petitioner.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN concurs in the judgment of reversal upon the premises stated in his separate opinion in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and in his dissenting opinion in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455, 457.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE believes this case is controlled by Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, and the judgment should be affirmed in accordance with the principles enunciated in the opinion of the Court in that case.
MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.