Head v. California
This text of 374 U.S. 509 (Head 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.
Opinion
HEAD
v.
CALIFORNIA.
Supreme Court of United States.
Petitioner pro se.
Stanley Mosk, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and A. Wallace Tashima, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted but the motion for leave to file petition for writ of certiorari is denied. Treating the papers submitted as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Douglas v. California, 372 U. S., at 358, 360.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
374 U.S. 509, 83 S. Ct. 1883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/head-v-california-scotus-1963.