DAUGHERTY v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 271 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
DAUGHERTY v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 271 (1967) 386 U.S. 271DAUGHERTY v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF
CALIFORNIA.
No. 19, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.
Petitioner pro se.
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 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in 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
DAUGHERTY v. CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 271 (1967) 386 U.S. 271 (1967) 386 U.S. 271 386 U.S. 271"> DAUGHERTY v. CALIFORNIA.ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 19, Misc.
Decided March 13, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. Petitioner pro se. 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 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in 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. 271, 272
