Skip to content


Billy Vs. Oklahoma - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number381 U.S. 354
AppellantBilly
RespondentOklahoma
Excerpt:
.....from the court of criminal appeals of oklahoma. no. 1034. decided may 24, 1965. appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. reported below: 397 p.2d 913. sid white for appellant. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. page 381 u.s. 354, 355 samara v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority, 381 u.s. 354 (1965) 381 u.s. 354 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court samara v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority, 381 u.s. 354 (1965) 381 u.s. 354 samara et al. v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority. appeal from the supreme court of oklahoma. no. 1002. decided may 24,.....
Judgment:
BILLY v. OKLAHOMA - 381 U.S. 354 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court BILLY v. OKLAHOMA, 381 U.S. 354 (1965) 381 U.S. 354

BILLY v. OKLAHOMA.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA.
No. 1034.
Decided May 24, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 397 P.2d 913.

Sid White for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 381 U.S. 354, 355


SAMARA v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, <a href="/101130"> 381 U.S. 354 </a> (1965) 381 U.S. 354 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court SAMARA v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, 381 U.S. 354 (1965) 381 U.S. 354

SAMARA ET AL. v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OKLAHOMA.
No. 1002.
Decided May 24, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 398 P.2d 89.

Leroy Powers and Gus Rinehart for appellants.

Charles Nesbitt, Attorney General of Oklahoma, and Harvey H. Cody and Joseph C. Muskrat, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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




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