help me understand this case please!!!! im soo lost
2006-09-16 14:14:38 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)
The defendant was convicted of verbal acts (speech) resulting in a breach of the peace. After the intial conviction, there was a trial de novo of appellant before a jury in the Superior Court. He was found guilty and the judgment of conviction was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the State. 91 N.H. 310, 18 A.2d 754.
The NH statute forbid "any offensive, derisive or annoying words".
The NH Supreme Court interpreted that the statute only applied if the words resulted in a breach of the peace, which is already a separate criminal violation.
The US Supreme Court said that's a reasonable interpretation, which is the equivalent of "fighting words", an unprotected category already recognized by the Supreme Court. So, no constitutional problems.
2006-09-16 15:14:22 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jehovah's witness called a guy in Rochester a name. Got busted for breach of the peace, shouted "Free speech!". Supreme court disagreed, upheld the state.
http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/69/
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=315&invol=568
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaplinsky_v._New_Hampshire
2006-09-16 14:24:52 · answer #2 · answered by mahgri 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋