Chimel v. California
393 U.S. 1011, 89 S. Ct. 637
This text of 393 U.S. 1011 (Chimel v. California) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Chimel v. California, 393 U.S. 1011, 89 S. Ct. 637 (1969).
Opinion
Sup. Ct. Cal. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 958.] Joint motion to dispense with printing appendix denied. Request by petitioner for additional time for oral argument denied. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Ronald M. George, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent on the joint motion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
393 U.S. 1011, 89 S. Ct. 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chimel-v-california-scotus-1969.