ROSS v. CALIFORNIA, 391 U.S. 470 (1968)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

ROSS v. CALIFORNIA, 391 U.S. 470 (1968)

391 U.S. 470

ROSS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 798, Misc.
Decided May 27, 1968.

Certiorari granted; 67 Cal. 2d 64, 429 P.2d 606, reversed.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Walter R. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, and Anderson v. Nelson, 390 U.S. 523.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.

Page 391 U.S. 470, 471

 


U.S. Supreme Court

ROSS v. CALIFORNIA, 391 U.S. 470 (1968)

391 U.S. 470

ROSS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 798, Misc.
Decided May 27, 1968.

Certiorari granted; 67 Cal. 2d 64, 429 P.2d 606, reversed.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Walter R. Jones, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, and Anderson v. Nelson, 390 U.S. 523.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied.

Page 391 U.S. 470, 471

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.