HAMILTON v. ALABAMA, 376 U.S. 650 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court
HAMILTON v. ALABAMA, 376 U.S. 650 (1964)
376 U.S. 650 HAMILTON v. ALABAMA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA.
No. 793.
Decided March 30, 1964.
Certiorari granted and judgment reversed.
Reported below: 275 Ala. 574, 156 So. 2d 926.
Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III and Oscar W. Adams, Jr. for petitioner.
Richmond M. Flowers, Attorney General of Alabama, and Bernard F. Sykes and Owen Bridges, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is reversed. Johnson v. Virginia, 373 U.S. 61.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK concurs in reversal of the judgment of contempt for reasons discussed in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, and Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199. Cf. Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
HAMILTON v. ALABAMA, 376 U.S. 650 (1964)
376 U.S. 650 HAMILTON v. ALABAMA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA.
No. 793.
Decided March 30, 1964.
Certiorari granted and judgment reversed.
Reported below: 275 Ala. 574, 156 So. 2d 926.
Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III and Oscar W. Adams, Jr. for petitioner.
Richmond M. Flowers, Attorney General of Alabama, and Bernard F. Sykes and Owen Bridges, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is reversed. Johnson v. Virginia, 373 U.S. 61.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK concurs in reversal of the judgment of contempt for reasons discussed in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, and Thompson v. City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 199. Cf. Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.
Page 376 U.S. 650, 651
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.
