SCHNEBLE v. FLORIDA, 392 U.S. 298 (1968)

U.S. Supreme Court

SCHNEBLE v. FLORIDA, 392 U.S. 298 (1968) 392 U.S. 298

SCHNEBLE ET AL. v. FLORIDA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.
No. 1070, Misc.
Decided June 10, 1968.

Certiorari granted; 201 So. 2d 881, vacated and remanded.

Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and George R. Georgieff, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further consideration in light of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123. See Roberts v. Russell, ante, p. 293.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE dissent for the reasons stated in MR. JUSTICE WHITE'S dissenting opinion in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 138 (1968).

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA, <a href="/cases/federal/us/392/298/">392 U.S. 298</a> (1968) 392 U.S. 298 (1968) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA, 392 U.S. 298 (1968) 392 U.S. 298

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT.
No. 1221, Misc.
Decided June 10, 1968.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Peter D. Bogart for petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 392 U.S. 298, 299

 


U.S. Supreme Court

SCHNEBLE v. FLORIDA, 392 U.S. 298 (1968) 392 U.S. 298

SCHNEBLE ET AL. v. FLORIDA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.
No. 1070, Misc.
Decided June 10, 1968.

Certiorari granted; 201 So. 2d 881, vacated and remanded.

Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and George R. Georgieff, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further consideration in light of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123. See Roberts v. Russell, ante, p. 293.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE dissent for the reasons stated in MR. JUSTICE WHITE'S dissenting opinion in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 138 (1968).

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA, <a href="/cases/federal/us/392/298/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/298/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/298/">392 U.S. 298</a></a></a> (1968) 392 U.S. 298 (1968) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA, 392 U.S. 298 (1968) 392 U.S. 298

BOGART v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT.
No. 1221, Misc.
Decided June 10, 1968.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Peter D. Bogart for petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 392 U.S. 298, 299

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.