Del Hoyo v. New York

Supreme Court

Del Hoyo v. New York

378 U.S. 570, 84 S. Ct. 1928, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1039, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 857

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 22, 1964

Docket893, Misc

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 378 U.S. 570 (Del Hoyo v. New York) 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

Del Hoyo v. New York, 378 U.S. 570, 84 S. Ct. 1928, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1039, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 857 (1964).

Pincite

Opinion

378 U.S. 570 (1964)

DEL HOYO
v.
NEW YORK.

No. 893, Misc.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided June 22, 1964. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

Leon B. Polsky and Edward A. Miller for petitioner.

Isidore Dollinger and Irving Anolik 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 of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Judicial Department, is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court in Jackson v. Denno, ante, p. 368.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Jackson v. Denno, supra.

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

378 U.S. 570 (1964)

DEL HOYO
v.
NEW YORK.

No. 893, Misc.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided June 22, 1964. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

Leon B. Polsky and Edward A. Miller for petitioner.

Isidore Dollinger and Irving Anolik 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 of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Judicial Department, is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court in Jackson v. Denno, ante, p. 368.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Jackson v. Denno, supra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

378 U.S. 570, 84 S. Ct. 1928, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1039, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/del-hoyo-v-new-york-scotus-1964.

Opinion

DEL HOYO v. NEW YORK.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

DEL HOYO
v.
NEW YORK.