Thigpen v. Roberts

464 U.S. 1006, 104 S. Ct. 521, 78 L. Ed. 2d 706, 52 U.S.L.W. 3439, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 2616
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Thigpen v. Roberts. Read the opinion of the Court — 468 U.S. 27
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided December 5, 1983·No. No. 82-1330·Published

Opinion

C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 956.] It appearing that respondent is not represented by a member of the Bar of this Court, it is ordered that Rhesa H. Barksdale, Esquire, of Jackson, Miss., is invited to present oral argument as amicus curiae in support of the judgment below. Oral argument in this case, presently scheduled for January 18, 1984, is postponed and the case of New York v. Uplinger, No. 82-1724 [certiorari granted, ante, p. 812], is set for oral argument in its stead.

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

Thigpen v. Roberts, 464 U.S. 1006, 104 S. Ct. 521, 78 L. Ed. 2d 706, 52 U.S.L.W. 3439, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 2616 (1983).

464 U.S. 1006 (Thigpen v. Roberts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.