SANTANA v. TEXAS, 397 U.S. 596 (1970)
U.S. Supreme Court
SANTANA v. TEXAS , 397 U.S. 596 (1970)
397 U.S. 596
George Rivera SANTANA
v.
TEXAS.
No. 1002.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 20, 1970
H. Ernest Griffith, for petitioner.
Crawford C. Martin, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Nola White, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Alfred Walker, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., and Robert C. Flowers and Monroe Clayton, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Texas.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Texas for further consideration in light of In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 25 L. Ed. 2d 368.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice STEWART dissent for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion of The Chief Justice in In re Winship, 397 U.S., at 375. Mr. Justice BLACK dissents for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in In re Winship, 397 U.S., at 377.[ Santana v. Texas 397 U.S. 596 (1970) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
SANTANA v. TEXAS , 397 U.S. 596 (1970)
George Rivera SANTANA
v.
TEXAS.
No. 1002.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 20, 1970
H. Ernest Griffith, for petitioner.
Crawford C. Martin, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Nola White, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Alfred Walker, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., and Robert C. Flowers and Monroe Clayton, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Texas.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Texas for further consideration in light of In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 25 L. Ed. 2d 368.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice STEWART dissent for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion of The Chief Justice in In re Winship, 397 U.S., at 375. Mr. Justice BLACK dissents for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in In re Winship, 397 U.S., at 377.[ Santana v. Texas 397 U.S. 596 (1970) ]
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.
