PRICE

v.

PITCHESS, SHERIFF; CARGILE ET AL. V. MICHIGAN; HOWIE V. UNITED STATES RUBBER CO., INC., ET AL.; TIMMONS V. MCGRATH; MORRIS V. UNITED STATES; BOTTOS V. AVAKIAN ET AL.; WHITE V. UNITED STATES; HOUSE V. STYNCHCOMBE, SHERIFF, ET AL.; GIBSON V. UNITED STATES; TOWNES V. UNITED STATES; MCCORQUODALE V. STYNCHCOMBE, SHERIFF, ET AL.; MURPHY V. FATZER, CHIEF JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, ET AL.; ROBINSON V. INDIANA; POSTON V. SOUTH CAROLINA; GALBRAITH V. CITY OF COLUMBUS, OHIO; FAIRCHILD V. MUNICIPAL COURT OF CALIFORNIA, IMPERIAL COUNTY, IMPERIAL JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Citator

Cited By

• Battie v. Estelle, 655 F.2d 692 (5th Cir. 1981)
  …med the judgment of the trial court. Battie v. State, 551 S.W. 2d 401 (Tex. Crim.App.1977). Battie next petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of certiorari, and the Supreme Court declined to review his case. Battie v. Texas, 434 U.S. 1041, 98 S.Ct. 782, 54 L.Ed.2d 790 (1978). After the Supreme Court denied his petition, Battie filed his first application for a writ of habeas corpus in state court. This application was denied by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Battie,…
• Milton v. Procunier, 744 F.2d 1091 (5th Cir. 1984)
  …ition is not required in a jury charge under the capital murder statute. Moreover, counsel has no right to ask prospective jurors to articulate their understanding of the language. Battie v. State, 551 S.W. 2d 401, 405 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1041, 98 S.Ct. 782, 54 L.Ed.2d 790 (1977). Milton’s theory is that this limitation on voir dire violated rights secured to him by the sixth and fourteenth amendments. The inability to pursue this inquiry, he posits, is so unfair as to deprive him of due…