Supreme Court of the United States, 1963

HOLMES v. CALIFORNIA Et Al.

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided April 15, 1963 · Clark, Douglas, Harlan, Per Curiam, White

372 U.S. 710; 83 S. Ct. 1020; 10 L. Ed. 2d 126; 1963 U.S. LEXIS 1815 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Petitioner pro se., Stanley Mosk, Attorney General of California, and William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Holcomb (Mich. 1975)
People v. Chrisman (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)
People v. Chrisman (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are 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 opinions in Douglas v. California, 372 U. S., at 358, 360. Mr. Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.