Skip to content


Davis Vs. California - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number386 U.S. 281
AppellantDavis
RespondentCalifornia
Excerpt:
davis v. california - 386 u.s. 281 (1967) u.s. supreme court reports davis v. california, 386 u.s. 281 (1967) davis v. california, 386 u.s. 281 (1967) 386 u.s. 281 davis v. california. on petition for writ of certiorari to the district court of appeal of california, first appellate district. no. 157, misc. decided march 13, 1967. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. petitioner pro se. thomas c. lynch, attorney general of california, and edward p. o'brien and james a. aiello, deputy attorneys general, for respondent. 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 remanded for further consideration in light of.....
Judgment:
DAVIS v. CALIFORNIA - 386 U.S. 281 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court Reports DAVIS v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 281 (1967) DAVIS v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 281 (1967) 386 U.S. 281

DAVIS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF
CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 157, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

Petitioner pro se.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Edward P. O'Brien and James A. Aiello, Deputy Attorneys General, for respondent.

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 remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.

MR. JUSTICE STEWART would grant certiorari, vacate the judgment, and remand for reconsideration in light of the views stated in his opinion concurring in the result in Chapman v. California, ante, at 42.

Page 386 U.S. 281, 282




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