LOUDEN v. UTAH, 379 U.S. 1 (1964)

U.S. Supreme Court

LOUDEN v. UTAH, 379 U.S. 1 (1964)

379 U.S. 1

LOUDEN v. UTAH.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF UTAH.
No. 6, Misc.
Decided October 12, 1964.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 15 Utah 2d 64, 387 P.2d 240.

George H. Searle for petitioner.

A. Pratt Kesler, Attorney General of Utah, and Ronald N. Boyce, Chief Assistant Attorney 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 Supreme Court of Utah for further proceedings in light of Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.

Page 379 U.S. 1, 2




U.S. Supreme Court

LOUDEN v. UTAH, 379 U.S. 1 (1964)

379 U.S. 1

LOUDEN v. UTAH.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF UTAH.
No. 6, Misc.
Decided October 12, 1964.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 15 Utah 2d 64, 387 P.2d 240.

George H. Searle for petitioner.

A. Pratt Kesler, Attorney General of Utah, and Ronald N. Boyce, Chief Assistant Attorney 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 Supreme Court of Utah for further proceedings in light of Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.

Page 379 U.S. 1, 2

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

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.