CRAIG v. BENNETT, 372 U.S. 521 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court
CRAIG v. BENNETT, 372 U.S. 521 (1963)
372 U.S. 521 CRAIG v. BENNETT, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA.
No. 841, Misc.
Decided March 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
COLE v. MANNING, 372 U.S. 521 (1963)
372 U.S. 521 COLE ET AL. v. MANNING, PENITENTIARY SUPERINTENDENT.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
No. 610, Misc.
Decided March 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 240 S. C. 260, 125 S. E. 2d 621.
Theodore W. Law, Jr. for appellants.
Daniel R. McLeod, Attorney General of South Carolina, and Victor S. Evans, 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.
U.S. Supreme Court
CRAIG v. BENNETT, 372 U.S. 521 (1963)
372 U.S. 521 CRAIG v. BENNETT, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA.
No. 841, Misc.
Decided March 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
COLE v. MANNING, 372 U.S. 521 (1963)
372 U.S. 521 COLE ET AL. v. MANNING, PENITENTIARY SUPERINTENDENT.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
No. 610, Misc.
Decided March 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 240 S. C. 260, 125 S. E. 2d 621.
Theodore W. Law, Jr. for appellants.
Daniel R. McLeod, Attorney General of South Carolina, and Victor S. Evans, 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.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.
