DAVIS v. MISSISSIPPI, 393 U.S. 821 (1968)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
DAVIS v. MISSISSIPPI , 393 U.S. 821 (1968)393 U.S. 821
John DAVIS, petitioner,
v.
MISSISSIPPI.
No. 60, Misc.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 14, 1968
Jack Greenberg, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr, Anthony G. Amsterdam and Jack Young, for petitioner.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen. of Mississippi, and G. Garland Lyell, Jr ., Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi granted limited to the first question presented by the petition which reads as follows:
'Whether the introduction into
evidence at petitioner's criminal trial of his fingerprints, taken
as a result of petitioner's illegal arrest, violated petitioner's
rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments?' Case
transferred to the appellate docket and placed on the summary
calendar.[ Davis v. Mississippi 393 U.S. 821 (1968)
]
Opinions
v.
MISSISSIPPI.
No. 60, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States October 14, 1968 Jack Greenberg, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr, Anthony G. Amsterdam and Jack Young, for petitioner. Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen. of Mississippi, and G. Garland Lyell, Jr ., Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi granted limited to the first question presented by the petition which reads as follows:
U.S. Supreme Court
DAVIS v. MISSISSIPPI , 393 U.S. 821 (1968) 393 U.S. 821 John DAVIS, petitioner,v.
MISSISSIPPI.
No. 60, Misc. Supreme Court of the United States October 14, 1968 Jack Greenberg, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr, Anthony G. Amsterdam and Jack Young, for petitioner. Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen. of Mississippi, and G. Garland Lyell, Jr ., Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi granted limited to the first question presented by the petition which reads as follows:
'Whether the introduction into
evidence at petitioner's criminal trial of his fingerprints, taken
as a result of petitioner's illegal arrest, violated petitioner's
rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments?' Case
transferred to the appellate docket and placed on the summary
calendar.[ Davis v. Mississippi 393
U.S. 821 (1968) ]
Search This Case
