Skip to content


Copenhaver Vs. Bennett - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number373 U.S. 242
AppellantCopenhaver
RespondentBennett
Excerpt:
.....for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. page 373 u.s. 242, 243 boyes v. united states, 373 u.s. 242 (1963) 373 u.s. 242 (1963) "> u.s. supreme court boyes v. united states, 373 u.s. 242 (1963) 373 u.s. 242 boyes v. united states. on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit. no. 59, misc. decided may 13, 1963. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. petitioner pro se. solicitor general cox for the united states. per curiam. the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the united states district court for the.....
Judgment:
COPENHAVER v. BENNETT - 373 U.S. 242 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court COPENHAVER v. BENNETT, 373 U.S. 242 (1963) 373 U.S. 242

COPENHAVER v. BENNETT, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA AND THE DISTRICT COURT OF LEE COUNTY,
IOWA. No. 928, Misc.
Decided May 13, 1963.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 373 U.S. 242, 243


BOYES v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/100612"> 373 U.S. 242 </a> (1963) 373 U.S. 242 (1963) "> U.S. Supreme Court BOYES v. UNITED STATES, 373 U.S. 242 (1963) 373 U.S. 242

BOYES v. UNITED STATES.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 59, Misc.
Decided May 13, 1963.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Petitioner pro se.

Solicitor General Cox for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas for further consideration in light of Sanders v. United States, ante, p. 1.

MR. JUSTICE CLARK and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would deny certiorari on the basis of their dissent in Sanders v. United States, ante, p. 23.




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