Eakes v. South Dakota

Background

A person was convicted in South Dakota for possessing, with intent to exhibit, an allegedly obscene film under a state statute that made many acts involving obscene material a misdemeanor. The statute criminalized bringing, selling, keeping for sale, exhibiting, or having possession with intent to exhibit obscene matter. The law defined obscenity by contemporary community standards and said a work is obscene if, considered as a whole, its dominant theme appeals to prurient interest.

Reasoning

The Court focused on how that conviction should be evaluated in light of its recent decisions about obscene material. Rather than resolving the law’s constitutionality here, the Court granted review, vacated the state-court judgment, and sent the case back so the state court can reconsider the conviction under Miller v. California and several related opinions the Court listed. The Supreme Court did not decide the final outcome itself but required the lower court to apply the updated obscenity standards.

Real world impact

The defendant’s conviction is vacated for now and is not a final judgment. Lower courts and prosecutors must re-evaluate prosecutions and prior convictions under the Court’s new obscenity tests, which could change how states enforce broad obscenity statutes and affect people who distribute or exhibit films.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan (joined by two colleagues) dissented, saying the statute is facially overbroad and that the First and Fourteenth Amendments bar wholesale suppression of sexually oriented materials; he would have reversed the conviction outright. Justice Douglas separately stated he would have reversed, viewing state obscenity regulation as constitutionally prohibited.