Does Section 235.10(1) of the North Carolina Code of Civil Procedure, which prohibits sex offenders from possessing obscene material, violate the constitution, or is unconstitutional?

The defendants have attacked the constitutionality of 235.10(1). It would appear that its constitutional validity has not been tested by the courts of this state. The prosecution, of course, relies on it to prove its prima facie case. The defendants argue that said 235.10(1) denies them due process, in that: although the legislature may provide that proof of one fact may constitute prima facie evidence of another; however, there is here 'no rational connection between the fact proved (i.e. selling, or possessing obscene material with intent to sell) and the ultimate fact presumed (i.e. knowledge of the material's contents and character'), citing Tot v. United States, 319 U.S. 463, 467--468, 63 S.Ct. 1241, 1245, 87 L.Ed. 1519 (1943).