WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 267 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 267 (1967) 386 U.S. 267WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF
CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 46.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.
Byron J. Walters for petitioner.
Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and C. Anthony Collins, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in the light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment for the reasons stated in his opinion concurring in the result in Chapman v. California, ante, at 42.
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 267 (1967) 386 U.S. 267 (1967) 386 U.S. 267 386 U.S. 267"> WHEATON v. CALIFORNIA.ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF
CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 46.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. Byron J. Walters for petitioner. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and C. Anthony Collins, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent. PER CURIAM. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in the light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18. MR. JUSTICE STEWART would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment for the reasons stated in his opinion concurring in the result in Chapman v. California, ante, at 42. Page 386 U.S. 267, 268
