HALL v. MISSISSIPPI, 385 U.S. 98 (1966)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
HALL v. MISSISSIPPI, 385 U.S. 98 (1966) 385 U.S. 98HALL v. MISSISSIPPI.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 672, Misc.
Decided November 14, 1966.
187 So. 2d 861, appeal dismissed.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 672, Misc.
Decided November 14, 1966.
187 So. 2d 861, appeal dismissed. PER CURIAM. The appeal is dismissed. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. Page 385 U.S. 98, 99
U.S. Supreme Court
HALL v. MISSISSIPPI, 385 U.S. 98 (1966) 385 U.S. 98 HALL v. MISSISSIPPI.APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 672, Misc.
Decided November 14, 1966.
187 So. 2d 861, appeal dismissed. PER CURIAM. The appeal is dismissed. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. Page 385 U.S. 98, 99
Search This Case
