DocketNumber: 684 M
Judges: Black, Clark, California
Filed Date: 4/10/1967
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/15/2024
Supreme Court of United States.
Appellants pro se.
Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and S. Clark Moore, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE CLARK are of the opinion that the judgment should be vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, supra.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would affirm the judgment below for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in Chapman v. California, supra, at 45.
Rodriguez v. Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration ( 2004 )
Consolidation Coal Co. v. Department of Treasury ( 1985 )
Tirino v. Local 164, Bartenders & Hotel & Restaurant ... ( 1968 )
jose-m-alonso-garcia-v-adalbert-friesecke-and-british-marine-mutual ( 1979 )
Liquilux Gas Services of Ponce, Inc. v. Tropical Gas Company ( 1969 )
Herman Lee Kindred v. State ( 2011 )
David Vega-Mena v. United States ( 1993 )
Ayco Development Corp. v. G. E. T. Service Co. ( 1981 )
Hartley Marine Corp. v. Mierke ( 1996 )
Brown v. Babbitt Ford, Inc. ( 1977 )
Hodgson v. UNION De EMPLEADOS De Los SUPERMERCADOS PUEB. ( 1974 )
Dare v. Secretary of the Air Force ( 1985 )
Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Municipality of San Juan ( 1980 )
Rice Growers' Ass'n of California v. County of Yolo ( 1971 )