Skip to content


Faudel Vs. Iowa - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number375 U.S. 397
AppellantFaudel
Respondentiowa
Excerpt:
.....for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. watkins v. beto, corrections director, 375 u.s. 397 (1964) 375 u.s. 397 (1964) "> u.s. supreme court watkins v. beto, corrections director, 375 u.s. 397 (1964) 375 u.s. 397 watkins v. beto, corrections director, et al. on petition for writ of certiorari to the court of criminal appeals of texas. no. 417, misc. decided january 6, 1964. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. petitioner pro se. waggoner carr, attorney general of texas, and howard fender, gilbert j. pena and allo b. crow, jr., assistant attorneys general, for respondents. per curiam. .....
Judgment:
FAUDEL v. IOWA - 375 U.S. 397 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court FAUDEL v. IOWA, 375 U.S. 397 (1964) 375 U.S. 397

FAUDEL v. IOWA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SCOTT COUNTY, IOWA.
No. 123, Misc.
Decided January 6, 1964.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Appellant pro se.

Evan Hultman, Attorney General of Iowa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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


WATKINS v. BETO, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR, <a href="/101011"> 375 U.S. 397 </a> (1964) 375 U.S. 397 (1964) "> U.S. Supreme Court WATKINS v. BETO, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR, 375 U.S. 397 (1964) 375 U.S. 397

WATKINS v. BETO, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR, ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF
TEXAS. No. 417, Misc.
Decided January 6, 1964.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Petitioner pro se.

Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, and Howard Fender, Gilbert J. Pena and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for respondents.

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 Court of Criminal Appeals for consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 ; Draper v. Washington, 372 U.S. 487 .

Page 375 U.S. 397, 398




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