In Re Ward

William Ward seeks a writ of habeas corpus to annul a 15-day sentence for contempt of court (Pen. Code, § 166) imposed for violation of a preliminaiy injunction.

Petitioner is a defendant in an action commenced by the City Attorney of Concord to enjoin as a nuisance the exhibition of an allegedly obscene motion picture. He challenges the validity of the preliminary injunction, which restrains exhibition of the film pending further proceedings in the action, upon the grounds (1) that the court did not conduct a “full adversary hearing” on the issue whether the film was obscene and (2) that the trial court did not view the film for the purpose of resolving this issue. (See People v. Noroff (1961) 67 Cal.2d 791, 793 [ 63 Cal.Rptr. 575 , 433 P.2d 479 ]; Zeitlin v.Arnebergh (1963) 59 Cal.2d 901, 904, 908-911 [ 31 Cal.Rptr. 800 , 383 P.2d 152 , 10 A.L.R.3d 707 ].)

I

Petitioner bases his argument on language in People ex rel. Busch v. Projection Room Theater (1976) 17 Cal.3d 42 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 328 , 550 P.2d 600 ], and United States Supreme Court decisions cited therein. In Busch , the court held that the exhibition of obscene magazines and films was a form of activity which…