COBERT v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 443 (1967)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
COBERT v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 443 (1967) 388 U.S. 443COBERT v. NEW YORK.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW
YORK.
No. 21.
Decided June 12, 1967.
Certiorari granted; reversed.
Ephraim London for petitioner.
Frank S. Hogan for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals of New York is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would affirm.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.
Opinions
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 21.
Decided June 12, 1967.
Certiorari granted; reversed. Ephraim London for petitioner. Frank S. Hogan for respondent. PER CURIAM. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals of New York is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would affirm. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm. Page 388 U.S. 443, 444
U.S. Supreme Court
COBERT v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 443 (1967) 388 U.S. 443 COBERT v. NEW YORK.ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 21.
Decided June 12, 1967.
Certiorari granted; reversed. Ephraim London for petitioner. Frank S. Hogan for respondent. PER CURIAM. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Court of Appeals of New York is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would affirm. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm. Page 388 U.S. 443, 444
Search This Case
