FORT WAYNE BOOKS, INC. v. INDIANA

Legal Principle at Issue

Whether the seizure of a bookstore and its contents for selling obscene materials under RICO, with only "probable cause" was a form of prior restraint and violated the First Amendment.

Action

Reversed and remanded. Petitioning party received a favorable disposition.

Facts/Syllabus

The State of Indiana and a local prosecutor (respondents) filed a civil action in state court against petitioner operator of an "adult bookstore" in Fort Wayne, alleging that it had violated the state Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute by engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity consisting of repeated violations of the state laws barring the distribution of obscene books and films. Respondents sought injunctive relief under the state Civil Remedies for Racketeering Activity (CRRA) statute, including forfeiture of all of petitioner's property used in the alleged racketeering activity, and moved, in a separate petition, for a court order for immediate seizure of all property subject to forfeiture, as authorized by statute. 

After the Allen County Superior Court heard testimony in support of this petition, it ordered the immediate seizure of petitioner's bookstore and its contents. Following petitioner's unsuccessful attempts to vacate the seizure order on federal constitutional grounds, the court certified the constitutional issues to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which held that the relevant RICO/CRRA provisions violated the Federal Constitution. The Indiana Supreme Court reversed, upholding both the constitutionality of the CRRA statute and the pretrial seizure. 

A related case, Sappenfield v. Indiana (No. 87-614), was consolidated into Fort Wayne Books for the Supreme Court. In Sappenfield, an adult bookstore operator was charged with distributing obscene matter as a misdemeanor and felony RICO violations based on those predicate obscenity acts. The trial court dismissed the RICO charges on the ground that the RICO statute was unconstitutionally vague as applied to obscenity predicate offenses. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the charges, holding that the RICO statute was not unconstitutional as applied to the state obscenity statute, and the Indiana Supreme Court declined review.