Keenan v. Superior Court

Summary

The California Supreme Court held that California Civil Code section 2225(b)(1), part of the state's Son of Sam law, facially violated the First Amendment and the California Constitution's liberty of speech clause. The court concluded that the provision imposed a content-based financial penalty on expressive materials and was overinclusive because it reached income from works that included substantial accounts of a convicted felon's crime, regardless of whether the income constituted profits from the crime. The court reversed the Court of Appeal's judgment denying writ relief.

Holdings

1. Section 2225(b)(1) is facially invalid under the First Amendment because it imposes a content-based financial disincentive on protected speech and is not narrowly tailored to serve the compelling interests of compensating crime victims and preventing criminals from profiting from crime.
2. Section 2225(b)(1) is facially invalid under article I, section 2, subdivision (a), of the California Constitution.
3. The court did not decide the constitutionality of section 2225(b)(2), which addresses profits from property, memorabilia, or rights whose value is enhanced by felony-related notoriety.

Questions Presented

1. Whether California Civil Code section 2225, subdivision (b)(1), facially violates the First Amendment by imposing a content-based financial burden on a convicted felon's proceeds from expressive materials that include the story of the felony.
2. Whether section 2225, subdivision (b)(1), violates the liberty of speech clause of article I, section 2, subdivision (a), of the California Constitution.
3. Whether the constitutional challenge to section 2225, subdivision (b)(2), and the ex post facto challenge were properly before the court.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded