Bullwinkle v. California
449 U.S. 988, 66 L. Ed. 2d 285, 101 S. Ct. 522, 49 U.S.L.W. 3371, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 3953
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 17, 1980·No. No. 80-5263; No. 80-5456·Published·Cited by 12 cases
Opinion
Appeals from Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question. Reported below: 105 Cal. App. 3d 82, 164 Cal. Rptr. 163.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bullwinkle v. California, 449 U.S. 988, 66 L. Ed. 2d 285, 101 S. Ct. 522, 49 U.S.L.W. 3371, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 3953 (1980).
449 U.S. 988 (Bullwinkle v. California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Smith v. Cutter Biological, Inc.
823 P.2d 717 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1991)
State v. Biegenwald
524 A.2d 130 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1987)
Thomas v. Kemp, Warden
479 U.S. 996 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Donald Wayne Thomas, Cross-Appellant v. Ralph Kemp, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Cross-Appellee
796 F.2d 1322 (Eleventh Circuit, 1986)
Association Of Community Organizations For Reform Now v. Municipality Of Golden
744 F.2d 739 (Tenth Circuit, 1984)
State v. Christianson
337 N.W.2d 502 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1983)
Dunham v. District of Columbia
442 A.2d 121 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1982)
Hardy v. Georgia
454 U.S. 1114 (Supreme Court, 1982)
People v. Ruggles
125 Cal. App. 3d 473 (California Court of Appeal, 1981)