KING v. ELLIS, 364 U.S. 445 (1960)
KING v. ELLIS, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR. U.S. Supreme Court
KING v. ELLIS, 364 U.S. 445 (1960) 364 U.S. 445
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 4, Misc.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.
Petitioner pro se.
Will Wilson, Attorney General of Texas, and Leon F. Pesek and Linward Shivers, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court for a full hearing. Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674.
U.S. Supreme Court
STATHAM v. CALIFORNIA, 364 U.S. 445 (1960) 364 U.S. 445 STATHAM v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 239, Misc.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 176 Cal. App. 2d 806, 1 Cal. Rptr. 767.
Carl Q. Christol for petitioner.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
KING v. ELLIS, 364 U.S. 445 (1960) 364 U.S. 445 KING v. ELLIS, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 4, Misc.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.
Petitioner pro se.
Will Wilson, Attorney General of Texas, and Leon F. Pesek and Linward Shivers, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court for a full hearing. Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674.
U.S. Supreme Court
STATHAM v. CALIFORNIA, 364 U.S. 445 (1960) 364 U.S. 445 STATHAM v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 239, Misc.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 176 Cal. App. 2d 806, 1 Cal. Rptr. 767.
Carl Q. Christol for petitioner.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Page 364 U.S. 445, 446
