BANKS v. CALIFORNIA, 387 U.S. 92 (1967)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
BANKS v. CALIFORNIA, 387 U.S. 92 (1967) 387 U.S. 92BANKS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF
CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 889, Misc.
Decided May 15, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.
Petitioner pro se.
Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Charles W. Rumph, 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 is remanded to the District Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18.
Opinions
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF
CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 889, Misc.
Decided May 15, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. Petitioner pro se. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Charles W. Rumph, 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 is remanded to the District Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18. Page 387 U.S. 92, 93
U.S. Supreme Court
BANKS v. CALIFORNIA, 387 U.S. 92 (1967) 387 U.S. 92 BANKS v. CALIFORNIA.ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF
CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 889, Misc.
Decided May 15, 1967.
Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. Petitioner pro se. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Albert W. Harris, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Charles W. Rumph, 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 is remanded to the District Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18. Page 387 U.S. 92, 93
Search This Case
