Skip to content


Harper Vs. Michigan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number392 U.S. 644
AppellantHarper
RespondentMichigan
Excerpt:
.....june 17, 1968. 379 mich. 440, 152 n. w. 2d 645, appeal dismissed. frank j. kelley, attorney general of michigan, robert a. derengoski, solicitor general, and stewart h. freeman, assistant attorney general, for appellee. per curiam. the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. carrillo v. craven, 392 u.s. 644 (1968) 392 u.s. 644 (1968) "> u.s. supreme court carrillo v. craven, 392 u.s. 644 (1968) 392 u.s. 644 carrillo v. craven, warden. on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit. no. 1201, misc. decided june 17, 1968. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. thomas c. lynch, attorney.....
Judgment:
HARPER v. MICHIGAN - 392 U.S. 644 (1968)
U.S. Supreme Court HARPER v. MICHIGAN, 392 U.S. 644 (1968) 392 U.S. 644

HARPER v. MICHIGAN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MICHIGAN.
No. 1103, Misc.
Decided June 17, 1968.

379 Mich. 440, 152 N. W. 2d 645, appeal dismissed.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General of Michigan, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and Stewart H. Freeman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


CARRILLO v. CRAVEN, <a href="/101917"> 392 U.S. 644 </a> (1968) 392 U.S. 644 (1968) "> U.S. Supreme Court CARRILLO v. CRAVEN, 392 U.S. 644 (1968) 392 U.S. 644

CARRILLO v. CRAVEN, WARDEN.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 1201, Misc.
Decided June 17, 1968.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Doris H. Maier, Assistant Attorney General, and Edsel W. Haws and John Fourt, 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 is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U.S. 54 .

Page 392 U.S. 644, 645




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