The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Grassi (D) was indicted for the interstate transportation of obscene materials, pornographic films. The prosecution wanted to show the jury these films to prove the obscenity element of the crime. D objected to the prejudicial effect that the obscenity of these films would have on his client. The trial court partially overruled D's objection and allowed the jury to see three of the films. The films showed bizarre and repulsive sex acts and also were very repetitive. D was convicted and appealed on the grounds the films should have been excluded since their probative value was substantially outweighed by their prejudicial effect.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.