Konigsberg v. State Bar of California
Opinion
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California granted. In addition to the merits, counsel are invited to consider, in their briefs and upon oral argument, the following questions relating to the jurisdiction of this Court:
(1) Were petitioner’s claims under the United States Constitution duly raised before the Supreme Court of California?
(2) Was the Supreme Court of California’s denial of a petition for a writ of review merely a refusal by that court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction or is it to [937]*937be deemed a disposition, “in the nature of a review,” Salot v. State Bar, 3 Cal. 2d 615, 617 [45 P. 2d 203], and as such a final judgment within the meaning of 28 U. S. C. § 1257?
(3) Assuming the latter, was the determination of the Supreme Court of California based upon a rejection of claims arising under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and more particularly, upon an evaluation of the constitutional significance of the evidence summarized under “1” on page '5 through the top of page 8 of the brief filed by the respondents on December 8, 1955, in opposition to the petition for the writ of certiorari herein?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
351 U.S. 936 (Konigsberg v. State Bar of California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.