Pea v. United States

378 U.S. 571, 84 S. Ct. 1929, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1040, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 858
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 22, 1964
Docket930, Misc
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 378 U.S. 571 (Pea v. United States) 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
Pea v. United States, 378 U.S. 571, 84 S. Ct. 1929, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1040, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 858 (1964).

Opinion

378 U.S. 571 (1964)

PEA
v.
UNITED STATES.

No. 930, Misc.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided June 22, 1964.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT.

Henry Lincoln Johnson, Jr. for petitioner.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg and Jerome Nelson for the United States.

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 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings in conformity 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

Related

Wells v. United States
407 A.2d 1081 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1979)
State v. Ussery
452 S.W.2d 146 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1970)
Charles M. Luck v. United States
348 F.2d 763 (D.C. Circuit, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
378 U.S. 571, 84 S. Ct. 1929, 12 L. Ed. 2d 1040, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pea-v-united-states-scotus-1964.