VINCENT v. TEXAS, 449 U.S. 199 (1980)

U.S. Supreme Court

VINCENT v. TEXAS, 449 U.S. 199 (1980)

449 U.S. 199

VINCENT v. TEXAS
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

No. 79-5962.

Argued November 5, 1980
Decided December 9, 1980

Appeal dismissed. Reported below: 586 S. W. 2d 880.

Robert D. McCutcheon, by appointment of the Court, 446 U.S. 934, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

Douglas M. Becker, Assistant Attorney General of Texas, argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief were Mark White, Attorney General, John W. Fainter, Jr., First Assistant Attorney General, and W. Barton Boling and Dawn Bruner, Assistant Attorneys General.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE POWELL would dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

Page 449 U.S. 199, 200




U.S. Supreme Court

VINCENT v. TEXAS, 449 U.S. 199 (1980)

449 U.S. 199

VINCENT v. TEXAS
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

No. 79-5962.

Argued November 5, 1980
Decided December 9, 1980

Appeal dismissed. Reported below: 586 S. W. 2d 880.

Robert D. McCutcheon, by appointment of the Court, 446 U.S. 934, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

Douglas M. Becker, Assistant Attorney General of Texas, argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief were Mark White, Attorney General, John W. Fainter, Jr., First Assistant Attorney General, and W. Barton Boling and Dawn Bruner, Assistant Attorneys General.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE POWELL would dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

Page 449 U.S. 199, 200

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.