Skip to content


Duncan Vs. Indiana - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number393 U.S. 533
AppellantDuncan
RespondentIndiana
Excerpt:
.....to the supreme court of indiana. no. 110, misc. decided february 24, 1969. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. john j. dillon, attorney general of indiana, and richard v. bennett, deputy attorney 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 supreme court of indiana for further consideration in light of smith v. hooey, ante, p. 374. triplett v. floyd circuit court, 393 u.s. 533 (1969) 393 u.s. 533 (1969) "> u.s. supreme court triplett v. floyd circuit court, 393 u.s. 533 (1969) 393 u.s. 533 triplett v. floyd circuit court et al. on petition for writ of.....
Judgment:
DUNCAN v. INDIANA - 393 U.S. 533 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court DUNCAN v. INDIANA, 393 U.S. 533 (1969) 393 U.S. 533

DUNCAN v. INDIANA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA.
No. 110, Misc.
Decided February 24, 1969.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

John J. Dillon, Attorney General of Indiana, and Richard V. Bennett, Deputy Attorney 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 Supreme Court of Indiana for further consideration in light of Smith v. Hooey, ante, p. 374.


TRIPLETT v. FLOYD CIRCUIT COURT, <a href="/102430"> 393 U.S. 533 </a> (1969) 393 U.S. 533 (1969) "> U.S. Supreme Court TRIPLETT v. FLOYD CIRCUIT COURT, 393 U.S. 533 (1969) 393 U.S. 533

TRIPLETT v. FLOYD CIRCUIT COURT ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA.
No. 57, Misc.
Decided February 24, 1969.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

John J. Dillon, Attorney General of Indiana, and Richard V. Bennett, Deputy Attorney General, for respondents.

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 Supreme Court of Indiana for further consideration in light of Smith v. Hooey, ante, p. 374.

Page 393 U.S. 533, 534




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