LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968)

U.S. Supreme Court

LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968)

393 U.S. 86

LICHTEN ET AL. v. TEXAS.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.

 434 S.W.2d 128, appeal dismissed.

Chris Dixie for appellants.

Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Carubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument.

Page 393 U.S. 86, 87

 


U.S. Supreme Court

LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968)

393 U.S. 86

LICHTEN ET AL. v. TEXAS.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.

 434 S.W.2d 128, appeal dismissed.

Chris Dixie for appellants.

Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Carubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument.

Page 393 U.S. 86, 87

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.