Skip to content


Randolph Vs. United States - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number389 U.S. 570
AppellantRandolph
RespondentUnited States
Excerpt:
randolph v. united states - 389 u.s. 570 (1968) u.s. supreme court randolph v. united states, 389 u.s. 570 (1968) 389 u.s. 570 randolph v. united states. appeal from the united states district court for the middle district of north carolina. no. 879. decided january 15, 1968. 274 f. supp. 200, affirmed. clyde c. randolph, jr., pro se, and jerry dee moize for appellant. solicitor general griswold, assistant attorney general weisl, morton hollander and jack h. weiner for the united states. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. dinis v. volpe, 389 u.s. 570 (1968) 389 u.s. 570 (1968) "> u.s. supreme court dinis v. volpe, 389 u.s. 570 (1968) 389 u.s. 570 .....
Judgment:
RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES - 389 U.S. 570 (1968)
U.S. Supreme Court RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES, 389 U.S. 570 (1968) 389 U.S. 570

RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 879.
Decided January 15, 1968.

274 F. Supp. 200, affirmed.

Clyde C. Randolph, Jr., pro se, and Jerry Dee Moize for appellant.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Weisl, Morton Hollander and Jack H. Weiner for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.


DINIS v. VOLPE, <a href="/102122"> 389 U.S. 570 </a> (1968) 389 U.S. 570 (1968) "> U.S. Supreme Court DINIS v. VOLPE, 389 U.S. 570 (1968) 389 U.S. 570

DINIS ET AL. v. VOLPE, GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS. No. 882.
Decided January 15, 1968.

264 F. Supp. 425, affirmed.

Edmund Dinis, pro se, for other appellants.

Elliot L. Richardson, Attorney General of Massachusetts, Howard M. Miller, Assistant Attorney General, and Mark L. Cohen, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Page 389 U.S. 570, 571




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