WALLACE v. VIRGINIA, 384 U.S. 891 (1966)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

WALLACE v. VIRGINIA, 384 U.S. 891 (1966)

384 U.S. 891

WALLACE ET AL. v. VIRGINIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 1011.
Decided June 20, 1966.

Certiorari granted; 357 F.2d 105, 107, affirmed.

George E. Allen, Sr., Anthony G. Amsterdam, Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Charles Stephen Ralston, S. W. Tucker and Henry L. Marsh III for petitioners.

Frederick T. Gray for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgments are affirmed. City of Greenwood v. Peacock, ante, p. 808.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS would reverse the judgments for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS in City of Greenwood v. Peacock, ante, at 835.

Page 384 U.S. 891, 892

 


U.S. Supreme Court

WALLACE v. VIRGINIA, 384 U.S. 891 (1966)

384 U.S. 891

WALLACE ET AL. v. VIRGINIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 1011.
Decided June 20, 1966.

Certiorari granted; 357 F.2d 105, 107, affirmed.

George E. Allen, Sr., Anthony G. Amsterdam, Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Charles Stephen Ralston, S. W. Tucker and Henry L. Marsh III for petitioners.

Frederick T. Gray for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgments are affirmed. City of Greenwood v. Peacock, ante, p. 808.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS would reverse the judgments for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS in City of Greenwood v. Peacock, ante, at 835.

Page 384 U.S. 891, 892

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.