LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968) 393 U.S. 86LICHTEN ET AL. v. TEXAS.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.
434 S.W.2d 128, appeal dismissed.
Chris Dixie for appellants.
Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Carubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.
434 S.W.2d 128, appeal dismissed. Chris Dixie for appellants. Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Carubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument. Page 393 U.S. 86, 87
U.S. Supreme Court
LICHTEN v. TEXAS, 393 U.S. 86 (1968) 393 U.S. 86 LICHTEN ET AL. v. TEXAS.APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 414.
Decided October 28, 1968.
434 S.W.2d 128, appeal dismissed. Chris Dixie for appellants. Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, Nola White, First Assistant Attorney General, A. J. Carubbi, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Hawthorne Phillips, Gilbert J. Pena, and Allo B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for argument. Page 393 U.S. 86, 87
Search This Case
