Spencer v. Texas

Supreme Court

Spencer v. Texas

382 U.S. 1022

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 31, 1966

DocketNo. 273

StatusPublished

This text of 382 U.S. 1022 (Spencer v. Texas) 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

Spencer v. Texas, 382 U.S. 1022 (1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted and further consideration of the question of jurisdiction in this case postponed to the hearing [1023]*1023of the case on the merits. The case is transferred to the appellate docket and set for oral argument immediately following No. 128, Mise.

Louis V. Nelson for appellant. Waggoner Can, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, Charles B. Swanner and Gilbert J. Pena, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

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

Appeal from Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted and further consideration of the question of jurisdiction in this case postponed to the hearing [1023]*1023of the case on the merits. The case is transferred to the appellate docket and set for oral argument immediately following No. 128, Mise.

Louis V. Nelson for appellant. Waggoner Can, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, Charles B. Swanner and Gilbert J. Pena, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

382 U.S. 1022, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spencer-v-texas-scotus-1966.