Skip to content


Wheaton Vs. California - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number386 U.S. 267
AppellantWheaton
RespondentCalifornia
Excerpt:
.....supreme court reports wheaton v. california, 386 u.s. 267 (1967) wheaton v. california, 386 u.s. 267 (1967) 386 u.s. 267 wheaton v. california. on petition for writ of certiorari to the district court of appeal of california, second appellate district. no. 46. decided march 13, 1967. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. byron j. walters for petitioner. thomas c. lynch, attorney general of california, william e. james, assistant attorney general, and c. anthony collins, deputy attorney general, for respondent. per curiam. the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. the judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in the light of chapman v. california, ante, p. 18. mr. justice stewart would.....
Judgment:
WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA - 386 U.S. 267 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court Reports WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 267 (1967) WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 267 (1967) 386 U.S. 267

WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF
CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 46.
Decided March 13, 1967.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

Byron J. Walters for petitioner.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and C. Anthony Collins, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in the light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.

MR. JUSTICE STEWART would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment for the reasons stated in his opinion concurring in the result in Chapman v. California, ante, at 42.

Page 386 U.S. 267, 268




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