Skip to content


Doughty Vs. Maxwell - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number372 U.S. 781
AppellantDoughty
RespondentMaxwell
Excerpt:
.....781 (1963) 372 u.s. 781 doughty v. maxwell, warden. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of ohio. no. 516, misc. decided april 22, 1963. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. reported below: 173 ohio st. 407, 183 n. e. 2d 368. petitioner pro se. mark mcelroy, attorney general of ohio, and james e. rattan, assistant attorney general, for respondent. 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 for further consideration in light of gideon v. wainwright, 372 u.s. 335 . page 372 u.s. 781, 782
Judgment:
DOUGHTY v. MAXWELL - 372 U.S. 781 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court DOUGHTY v. MAXWELL, 372 U.S. 781 (1963) 372 U.S. 781

DOUGHTY v. MAXWELL, WARDEN.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 516, Misc.
Decided April 22, 1963.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 173 Ohio St. 407, 183 N. E. 2d 368.

Petitioner pro se.

Mark McElroy, Attorney General of Ohio, and James E. Rattan, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

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 for further consideration in light of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 .

Page 372 U.S. 781, 782




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