President's Commission on Organized Crime (1986) (Testimony of Martin Light).

H. COMMUNITY, CITIZEN AND CORPORATE ACTION AND RESPONSIBILITY

1.

Cases

2.

A. Federal

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).

NAACP v. Claibourne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982).

Renton v.

Playtime Theatres, Inc., No. 84-1360, ship op. (Feb. 25, 1986).

Missouri

v.

National Organization for Women, 670 F. 2d 1301 (8th Cir. 1980).

Testimony

Washington, D.C., Vol. I, Kandy Stroud, p. 243.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Bates, F., Pornography and The Expert Witness, 20 Crim.
L.Q. 250 (1978).

Beckett and Bell, Community Standards: Admitting a
Public Opinion Poll Into Evidence in an Obscenity
Case, 84, Case and Comment 18 (1979).

Binding Advisory Jury in Missouri Obscenity Cases, 45
U.M.K.C. L. Rev. 159 (1976).

Brigman, The Controversial Role of the Expert in
Obscenity Litigation, 7 Cap. U. L. Rev. 519 (1978).

6. Cohen, F., Obscenity Cases: Anatomy of a Winning Defense, 14 Crim. L. Bull. 225 (1978).

8.

9.

Comment, Expert Testimony in Obscenity Cases, 18
Hastings L. J. 161 (1966).

Community Standards in Obscenity Adjudication, 66 Cal.
L. Rev. 1277 (1978).

The Consitutionality of Admitting the Video Tape
Testimony at Trial of Sexually Abused Children, 7
Whittier L. Rev. 639 (1985).

10. Dewitt E. and Blackmar, C., Federal Jury Practice and Instructions (1970).

11. Evidentiary and Procedural Trends in State Legislation and Other Emerging Issues in Child Sexual Abuse Cases, 89 Dick. L. Rev. 645 (1985).

12. Frank, Obscenity: Some Problems of Values and the Use of Experts, 41 Was. L. Rev. 631 (1966).

13. George, B.S., Jr., Obscenity Litigation: An Overview of Current Legal Controversies, National Journal of Criminal Defense. 189 (1977).

14. Jury's Role in Criminal Obscenity Cases

A Closer Look,

28 Kan. L. Rev. 111 (1974).

15. Kutz, E., Regulating Obscenity, 5 Whitt. L. Rev. 1 (1983).

16. Lefcourt, G., et al. Obscenity Law (Practicing Law Institute Outline, 1974).

17. Linz, D., Assessing Courtroom Performance from the Perspective of the Social Science Observer, The Trial Practice Attorney, and The "Jury Box". Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association, Toronto, June, 1982.

18. Linz, D., Penrod, S., Coates, D., Atkinson, M., Heuer, L., Herzberg, S., The Use of Experts In the Courtroom: Attorney Judgments of Expert Witness Credibility. Annual Meeting, Academy of Criminal Justice Science, March 1982.

19. Mann, J., Fahringer Plays to a Hostile Court, 4 Am. Law 39 (Aug. 1982).

20. Mayer, M.F., New Approach to Obscenity Doctrine, 21 St. Louis. U.L.J. 366

21. McCommon, P., Bull, B., Taylor, B., Preparation and Trial of an Obscenity Case: A Guide for Prosecuting Attorney, (1985).

22. McGaffey, A Realistic Look at Expert Witnesses in Obscenity Cases, 69 N.W.U.L. Rev. 218 (1974).

23. Munson Lentz, M., Comparison Evidence in Obscenity Trials, 15 U. Mich. J.L. Ref. 45 (1981).

24.

Note, Constitutional Law Appellate Procedure in
Obscenity, 52 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1131 (1983).

25. Note, The Use of Expert Testimony in Obscenity Litigation, 1965 Wisc. L. Rev. 113 (1965)

26. Pattern Jury Change, U.S. Fifth Circuit District Judge Association, (1983).

27. Penrod, S., Linz, D., Coates, D., Heur, L., Atkinson, M., Herzberg, S., First Impressions in the Courtroom: Juror Impressions of Prosecuting and Defense Attorneys in Voir Dire and Opening Statements. Annual Meeting, Academy of Criminal Justice Science, March, 1982.

28. Prior Adversary Hearings on the Question of Obscenity,
Colum. L. Rev. 1403 (1970).

29. Prior Adversary Hearing: Solution to Procedural Due
Process Problems in Obscenity Seizures, 46 N.Y.U.
L. Rev. 80 (1971).

30. Procedural Problems in the Seizure of Obscenity, 37
Albany L. Rev. 203 (1972).

31. Requirement and Techniques for Holding an Adversary
Hearing Prior to Seizure of Obscene Material, 48
N.C. L. Rev. 830 (1970).

32. Rogge, Obscenity Litigation, 10 Am. Jur. Trials S50

33.

34.

(1965).

Schauer, F., The Law of Obscenity (1976). (See
specifically Chapters 13 and 17).

Stern, Toward a Rationale for the Use of Expert
Testimony in Obscenity Litigation, 20 Case West.
Res. L. Rev. 527 (1969).

35. Stevens, P., Community Standards and Federal Obscenity
Prosecutions, 55 S. Cal. L. Rev. 693 (1982).

36. Stoddart, C., Corporate Responsibility for Common Law
Crime, 45 Crim. C. 35 (Feb. 1981).

37. Stone, R., Obscenity Law Reform: Some Practical
Problems, 130 New L.J. 872 (1980).

38. Tuling, D., Defense of "Public Good", 129 New L. J. 299
(1979).

39. Weaver, G., Handbook on the Prosecution of Obscenity
Cases, (1985).

40. Waples, G.L., White, M.J., Choice of Community Standards
in Federal Obscenity Proceedings: The Role of The
Constitution and the Common Law, 64 Va. L. Rev. 399
(1978).

41. Weinberg, R., The Right to a Jury Trial in Obscenity
Prosecution: A Sixth Amendment Analysis for a

First Amendment Problem, 50 Fordham L. Rev. 1311
(1982).