Skip to content


Beacham Vs. Braterman - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number396 U.S. 12
AppellantBeacham
RespondentBraterman
Excerpt:
.....396 u.s. 12 (1969) 396 u.s. 12 beacham v. braterman et al. appeal from the united states district court for the southern district of florida no. 404. decided october 20, 1969 300 f. supp. 182, affirmed. bruce s. rogow for appellant. earl faircloth, attorney general of florida, and t. t. turnbull and james mcguirk, assistant attorneys general, for appellees. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. whiddon v. united states, 396 u.s. 12 (1969) 396 u.s. 12 (1969) "> u.s. supreme court whiddon v. united states, 396 u.s. 12 (1969) 396 u.s. 12 whiddon v. united states on.....
Judgment:
BEACHAM v. BRATERMAN - 396 U.S. 12 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court BEACHAM v. BRATERMAN, 396 U.S. 12 (1969) 396 U.S. 12

BEACHAM v. BRATERMAN ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT
OF FLORIDA No. 404.
Decided October 20, 1969

300 F. Supp. 182, affirmed.

Bruce S. Rogow for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and T. T. Turnbull and James McGuirk, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.


WHIDDON v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/102253"> 396 U.S. 12 </a> (1969) 396 U.S. 12 (1969) "> U.S. Supreme Court WHIDDON v. UNITED STATES, 396 U.S. 12 (1969) 396 U.S. 12

WHIDDON v. UNITED STATES
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 267, Misc.
Decided October 20, 1969

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded to District Court.

Solicitor General Griswold for the United States.

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 District Court for the Eastern District of Texas for resentencing. Prince v. United States, 352 U.S. 322 , and Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. 415 .

Page 396 U.S. 12, 13




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