In Miller v. California (1973) 413 U.S. 15, the United States Supreme Court set out the guidelines for the states in regulating obscene material. The high court held the states could regulate materials that "taken as a whole, appeal to the prurient interest in sex, which portray sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and which, taken as a whole, do not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." ( Miller v. California, supra, 413 U.S. at p. 24.) In determining whether such material is obscene, the trier of fact must decide "(a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest ...; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." (Ibid.) Material that is obscene, as defined in Miller, is not entitled to First Amendment protection. ( Id. at p. 36.)