Benton v. Maryland

393 U.S. 994, 89 S. Ct. 481
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided December 16, 1968·No. No. 201·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Ct. Sp. App. Md. [Certiorari granted, 392 U. S. 925.] Case restored to the docket for reargument on March 24, 1969, limited to the following question, not specified in the original writ: Does the “concurrent sentence doctrine,” enunciated in Hira-bayashi v. United States, 320 U. S. 81, 105, and subsequent cases, have continuing validity in light of such decisions as Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U. S. 629, 633, n. 2, Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U. S. 54, Carafas v. LaVallee, 391 U. S. 234, 237-238, and Sibron v. New York, 392 U. S. 40, 50-58? The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief expressing the views of the United States and to participate in oral argument.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Benton v. Maryland, 393 U.S. 994, 89 S. Ct. 481 (1968).

393 U.S. 994 (Benton v. Maryland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Patterson v. McLean Credit Union
485 U.S. 617 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Waterstaat v. United States
252 A.2d 507 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1969)
Mortimer Norman Koran v. United States
408 F.2d 1321 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
Broyhill v. Morris
408 F.2d 820 (Fourth Circuit, 1969)
United States v. William Daniel Roberts, Jr.
408 F.2d 360 (Second Circuit, 1969)