Supreme Court of the United States, 1967

Ratner v. California

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 12, 1967 · Clark, Brennan, Roth, Massachusetts

388 U.S. 442; 87 S. Ct. 2092; 18 L. Ed. 2d 1304; 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1092 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Richard A. Lavine for petitioners., Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Robert R. Granucci and Charles W. Rumph, Deputy Attorneys General, for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

Vernon Walker Huffman v. United States, Dennis Eugene Pryba v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1972)
United States v. William Groner, D/B/A Lucky Distributors (5th Cir. 1972)
People v. Bloss (Mich. 1972)
Grand Rapids City Attorney v. Bloss (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
People v. Billingsley (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Smith (Mo. 1967)
State v. Hoyt (Minn. 1970)
Commonwealth v. LaLONDE (Pa. 1972)
Commonwealth v. Dell Publications, Inc. (Pa. 1967)
State v. Carlson (Minn. 1972)
United States v. New Orleans Book Mart, Inc. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1971)
In re Seven Magazines (R.I. 1970)
In re Seven Magazines (R.I. 1970)
Poulos v. Rucker (United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama 1968)
Leon J. Grant and Walter F. Wissman v. United States (9th Cir. 1967)
Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton (Supreme Court of the United States 1973)
State v. Hoelscher (Minn. 1972)
State v. Katz (Superior Court of Delaware 1971)
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas (Supreme Court of the United States 1968)
People v. Mature Enterprises, Inc. (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1973)
State Ex Rel. Sensenbrenner v. Adult Book Store (Ohio Ct. App. 1971)
People v. Kirkpatrick (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1970)

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

Per Curiam.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Appellate Department of the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.

The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Clark, and Mr. Justice Brennan would affirm. Mr. Justice Harlan adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.

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