JONES
v.
CALIFORNIA

U.S. | 1963-06-17
Nos. 649, Misc.
Mr. Justice Clark and Mr. Justice Harlan dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Douglas v. California, 372 U. S., at 358, 360.
374 U.S. 501 Supreme Court of the United States (1963) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The motion for .leave to proceed in forma'pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353.

Mr. Justice Clark and Mr. Justice Harlan dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Douglas v. California, 372 U. S., at 358, 360.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Swenson v. Donnell, 382 F.2d 248 (8th Cir. 1967)
    …dge Oliver, the Supreme Court on several other occasions has summarily reversed pre-Douglas convictions in light of Douglas. See, e. g., Head v. State of California, 374 U.S. 509, 83 S.Ct. 1883, 10 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1963) ; Jones v. State of California, 374 U.S. 501, 83 S.Ct. 1S78, 10 L.Ed.2d 1045 (1963) ; Harris v. California, 374 U.S. 499, 83 S.Ct. 1870, 10 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1963) ; Tiller v. California, 372 U.S. 771, 83 S.Ct. 1107, 10 L.Ed.2a 140 (1963). . See also Tettamble v. Missouri, 386 U.S. 265, 87 S.Ct.…
  • Maness v. Swenson, 385 F.2d 943 (8th Cir. 1967)
    …he appeal of Donnell v. Swenson, sub. nom. Swenson v. Donnell, the Supreme Court had also reviewed pre-Douglas convictions in the light of Douglas, citing Head v. California, 374 U.S. 509, 83 S.Ct. 1883, 10 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1963) ; Jones v. California, 374 U.S. 501, 83 S.Ct. 1878, 10 L.Ed.2d 1045 (1963) ; Harris v. California, 374 U.S. 499, 83 S.Ct. 1876, 10 L. Ed.2d 1044 (1963) ; Tiller v. California, 372 U.S. 771, 83 S.Ct. 1107, 10 D.Ed.2d 140 (1963). Judge Matthes also noted that the question of retrospecti…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw