HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 265 (1967)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 265 (1967) 386 U.S. 265HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF
CALIFORNIA.
No. 37, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied because the petition was not timely filed.
Opinions
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 37, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. PER CURIAM. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18. MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied because the petition was not timely filed. Page 386 U.S. 265, 266
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 265 (1967) 386 U.S. 265 (1967) 386 U.S. 265 386 U.S. 265"> HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA.ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 37, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. PER CURIAM. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18. MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied because the petition was not timely filed. Page 386 U.S. 265, 266
Search This Case
