Skip to content


Tabb Vs. California - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number375 U.S. 27
AppellantTabb
RespondentCalifornia
Excerpt:
tabb v. california - 375 u.s. 27 (1963) u.s. supreme court tabb v. california, 375 u.s. 27 (1963) 375 u.s. 27 tabb v. california. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of california. no. 83, misc. decided october 14, 1963. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. petitioner pro se. stanley mosk, attorney general of california, and william e. james, assistant attorney general, for respondent. per curiam. the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the supreme court of california for further consideration in light of douglas v. california, 372 u.s. 353 . mr. justice harlan,.....
Judgment:
TABB v. CALIFORNIA - 375 U.S. 27 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court TABB v. CALIFORNIA, 375 U.S. 27 (1963) 375 U.S. 27

TABB v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 83, Misc.
Decided October 14, 1963.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Petitioner pro se.

Stanley Mosk, Attorney General of California, and William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of California for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 .

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, for the reasons stated in Daegele v. Kansas, ante, p. 1, would have withheld disposition of this petition for certiorari until the disposition, after argument, of that case.

Page 375 U.S. 27, 28




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //