My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005/06/15 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2005
>
2005/06/15 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2017 2:25:37 PM
Creation date
2/10/2017 11:05:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
6/15/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
901
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Zoning for the Pornographic Arts, City Development Department, August, 1976, <br />Kansas City, Missouri <br />2 The cases reviewed in depth were: <br />A. Young v American Mini Theaters, Inc., 96 S. Ct. 2440 (1976). This was the <br />Supreme Court review of the City of Detroit zoning ordinance which regulated <br />(a) the proximity of adult uses to residential zones, (b) the proximity of <br />adult uses to other areas where heavy traffic or concentrations of minors <br />were found and (c) the density of adult businesses. The Court held that a <br />city has the authority to control the location and density of adult entertain- <br />ment businesses based on its police power right and duty to protect the <br />health, safety and welfare of its citizenry. <br />B. Miller v California, 93 S. Ct. 2607 (1973). This decision laid down the <br />most recent standard for determining what is obscene. This decision is the <br />basis for the Texas Penal Code Chapter 43, Public Indecency. <br />C. Smith v United States, 97 S. Ct. 1756 (19.77), Paris Adult Theatre I v Slaton, <br />93 S. Ct. 2629 (1973), and Roth v United States, 77, S.. Ct. 1304 (1957). <br />These earlier decisions were reviewed in order to determine the history of <br />restrictions upon 1st Amendment guarantees. This review revealed that in <br />effect the Court is ruling on the controversial problem of obscenity and <br />state community standards determining prurient appeal and patent offensiveness <br />on a case by case basis. <br />3 Amended by Act 1975, 64th Leg., p 372, Ch. 163, j 1, eff. September 1, 1975. <br />4 Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p 883, Ch. 399, j 1, eff. January 1, 1974. <br />5 <br />U.S. News & World Report, September 13, 1976, p. 76. <br />6 Time, April 5, 1976. <br />EVER00338 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.