Adult Video Association Doe, Inc. Roe, Inc. Paul Poe v. Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States

Bad Law
41 F.3d 503·1994 WL 666079
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 199490-55252California951 words

Opinion

Opinion

Adult Video Association, Doe, Inc., Roe, Inc., and Paul Poe (collectively, “Adult Video”) filed an action seeking a declaration that the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act’s (“RICO”) criminal penalty provisions found under 18 U.S.C. § 1963 are facially unconstitutional when enforced against obscenity offenses. The district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Adult Video appealed the district court’s dismissal of its First Amendment challenge to RICO’s criminal penalty provisions. We affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that (1) Adult Video satisfied standing and ripeness requirements; (2) RICO’s criminal penalty provisions were neither unconstitutionally chilling nor overbroad; (3) the provision authorizing pre-trial seizures of obscene materials was unconstitutional; and (4) the provisions authorizing post-trial forfeiture were facially invalid to the extent they authorized forfeiture of “those assets or interests of the defendant invested in legitimate expressive activity being conducted by parts of the enterprise uninvolved or only marginally involved in the racketeering activity.” Adult Video Ass’n v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.