Howell controversey - Is there a case?

Update from Last Howell update

Is there a case of prosecution? From what I have seen, looking at it as objectively as possible, probably not. A surprise to me is that there is little to no precident that I have found. I MAY find some if I did more digging through my Westlaw access, but I don't have ten hours of free time to devote to this.

There are two series of statutes which may fit.

750.142 and 750.143: are one section of statutes

750.142 Furnishing obscene publications or criminal news to minors.

Sec. 142.

A person who sells, gives away or in any way furnishes to a person under the age of 18 years a book, pamphlet, or other printed paper or other thing, containing obscene language, or obscene prints, pictures, figures or descriptions tending to corrupt the morals of youth, or any newspapers, pamphlets or other printed paper devoted to the publication of criminal news, police reports, or criminal deeds, and a person who shall in any manner hire, use or employ a person under the age of 18 years to sell, give away, or in any manner distribute such books, pamphlets or printed papers, and any person having the care, custody or control of a person under the age of 18 years, who permits him or her to engage in any such employment, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.


History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.142 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 14, Imd. Eff. Feb. 19, 1972


-----
750.143 Children; exhibition of obscene matter.

Sec. 143.

Exhibition of obscene matter within view of children—Any person who shall exhibit upon any public street or highway, or in any other place within the view of children passing on any public street or highway, any book, pamphlet or other printed paper or thing containing obscene language or obscene prints, figures, or descriptions, tending to the corruption of the morals of youth, or any newspapers, pamphlets, or other printed paper or thing devoted to the publication of criminal news, police reports or criminal deeds, shall on conviction thereof be guilty of a misdemeanor.


History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.143

---------------------
There has only been one case I found that covered those two statutes. Butler v. State of Mich. (352 U.S. 380), (77 S.Ct. 524) This was a Supreme Court Case from Feb 25, 1957. Due to copyrights, I can not reprint the whole decision unless it is found in the public record. An individual was convicted under this statute (sold a book to a cop, not a kid) and the conviction was overturned on 14th Amendment and Due Process grounds. It's not an exact precidence, but I suspect that charges under these two statutes would be dismissed based on the only precidence so far - the Butler decision.

-------------

The other statute section refers to 722.675.

However, Section 5 of 722.675 has an exception spelled out in 722.676. The question is this. Does it comply with the the revised school code and is part of a "school program permitted by law?"

While there is precidence of 722.675, not that I have found related to school programs. Cyberspace Communications, Inc. v. Engler however declared the internet and cyberspace portion (1999 amendments) of that statute unconstitutional on 1st Amendment Grounds.

--------------

Disclaimer - I'm not yet an attorney, nor did I spend the night at a Holiday Inn Express. This is not legal advice. However, based on what I have read by statute and precident, as well as common law principles of vagueness in how stautes can be read, I don't expect to see a final conviction against school officials for these books. That said, I'm not the prosecutor, nor a judge or juror. Those three elements make the final decisions on this matter unless there's a change in statute.