<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Community Defense Counsel &#187; State: California</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/state-california/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress</link>
	<description>Protecting Children and Their Neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 17:30:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court refuses to hear Alameda Books sexually oriented businesses case</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/28/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-alameda-books-sexually-oriented-businesses-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/28/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-alameda-books-sexually-oriented-businesses-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Alameda Books v. City of Los Angeles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2647</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today, the U.S. Supreme Court <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/112811zor.pdf">refused to hear</a> <em>Los Angeles v. Alameda Books</em> Nos. 11-245, 11-379.  Document related to that litigation, the 9th Circuit opinion, and a summary of the issues involved can be found at <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/11/petitions-to-watch-conference-of-november-22-2011/">SCOTUS Blog here</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/28/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-alameda-books-sexually-oriented-businesses-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court asked to revisit City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc.  concerning regulation of sexually oriented businesses</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/22/supreme-court-asked-to-revisit-city-of-los-angeles-v-alameda-books-inc-concerning-regulation-of-sexually-oriented-businesses/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/22/supreme-court-asked-to-revisit-city-of-los-angeles-v-alameda-books-inc-concerning-regulation-of-sexually-oriented-businesses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: City of Los Angeles v. Alameda]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2643</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/city-of-los-angeles-v-alameda-books-inc/">SCOTUSblog</a> reports that <em>City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc.</em> is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court again.		
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/22/supreme-court-asked-to-revisit-city-of-los-angeles-v-alameda-books-inc-concerning-regulation-of-sexually-oriented-businesses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cal. Apellate Court: Dad can paste daughter’s face on porn photo</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/06/09/cal-apellate-court-dad-can-paste-daughter%e2%80%99s-face-on-porn-photo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/06/09/cal-apellate-court-dad-can-paste-daughter%e2%80%99s-face-on-porn-photo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:34:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: State v. Gerber]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Milpitas man who used a computer to paste photos of his 13-year-old daughter's head onto bodies of women in graphic poses shouldn't have been convicted of possessing child pornography because the pictures didn't show minors engaging in sex acts, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/06/09/cal-apellate-court-dad-can-paste-daughter%e2%80%99s-face-on-porn-photo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>9th Circuit reinstates L.A. SOB ordinance</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/28/9th-circuit-reinstates-l-a-sob-ordinance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/28/9th-circuit-reinstates-l-a-sob-ordinance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:08:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 9th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2528</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/01/28/09-55367.pdf"><em>Alameda Books Inc. v. City of Los Angeles</em></a>, No. 09-55367 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 2011)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/28/9th-circuit-reinstates-l-a-sob-ordinance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CA: Lake Forest to consider moratorium on adult businesses</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/04/ca-lake-forest-to-consider-moratorium-on-adult-businesses/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/04/ca-lake-forest-to-consider-moratorium-on-adult-businesses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2011 21:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2484</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["The City Council on Tuesday will consider an interim ordinance establishing a moratorium on permits for adult businesses following the rezoning of land from business park to homes and commercial uses."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/01/04/ca-lake-forest-to-consider-moratorium-on-adult-businesses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CA: Victim of child pornography awarded $2,851.20</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/19/ca-victim-of-child-pornography-awarded-2851-20/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/19/ca-victim-of-child-pornography-awarded-2851-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 22:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Restitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2321</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>U.S. v. Yang</em>, No. 1:09-CR-00168 AWI, 2010 WL 2011561 (E.D. Cal. May 19. 2010)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/19/ca-victim-of-child-pornography-awarded-2851-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CA: Gilroy Council approves SOB ordinance</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/26/ca-gilroy-council-approves-sob-ordinance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/26/ca-gilroy-council-approves-sob-ordinance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:17:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Nudity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1916</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.gilroydispatch.com/news/262667-council-approves-adult-entertainment-ordinance">Gilroy Dispatch</a>: "Gilroy's City Council on Monday unanimously approved revisions to an adult entertainment ordinance, outlawing full nudity at adult businesses among other restrictions."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/26/ca-gilroy-council-approves-sob-ordinance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cali. holds that &#8220;not all portrayals of sexual activity are obscene&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/04/09/cali-holds-that-not-all-portrayals-of-sexual-activity-are-obscene/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/04/09/cali-holds-that-not-all-portrayals-of-sexual-activity-are-obscene/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Minors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obscenity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In People v. David Lawrence Dyke, A117955 (Cal. Super. April 9, 2009), Mr. Dyke appeals his conviction via jury trial for exhibiting harmful matter to a minor in violation of Pen. Code,1 § 288.2, subd. (a). His daughter’s friend (A.S.), aged 16, testified that Dyke had, in the course of “flipping through the television channels,” allowed two pornographic scenes to linger on the television for about 1-8 minutes and 45 seconds, respectively. Dyke was also convicted for misdemeanor sexual battery for his actions subsequent to the issue on appeal.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/04/09/cali-holds-that-not-all-portrayals-of-sexual-activity-are-obscene/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>1990-1997: National Law Center Summaries of &#8220;SOB Land Use&#8221; Studies</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Economic Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects: Quality of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Oklahoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Wisconsin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Minors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Crime Impact Studies by Municipal and State Governments on Harmful Secondary Effects of Sexually Oriented Businesses.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cali. court rules that &#8220;knowing possession&#8221; encompasses automatic downloads in &#8220;temporary internet files&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/01/08/cali-court-rules-that-knowing-possession-encompasses-automatic-downloads-in-temporary-internet-files/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/01/08/cali-court-rules-that-knowing-possession-encompasses-automatic-downloads-in-temporary-internet-files/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1086</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court held (1) that the "defendant personally possessed the child pornography files on his family's computer" and (2) that "an image displayed on a computer screen, as opposed to the underlying file, may be knowingly possessed or controlled in violation of child pornography statute."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/01/08/cali-court-rules-that-knowing-possession-encompasses-automatic-downloads-in-temporary-internet-files/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

