Supreme Court of the United States, 1964

Ruark v. Colorado

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 22, 1964 · Harlan

378 U.S. 585 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Petitioner pro se., Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Attorney General, and John E. Bush, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Lopez (Cal. 1965)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Stevens v. Myers (Pa. 1965)
Donnell v. Swenson (District Court, W.D. Missouri 1966)
Cruz v. Patterson (United States District Court for the District of Colorado 1966)
Theodore C. Ruark v. Harry C. Tinsley, Warden (10th Cir. 1965)
Cruz v. People (Colo. 1965)
Stanmore v. People (Colo. 1965)
Cruz v. People (Colo. 1965)
Cruz v. People (Colo. 1965)
Ruark v. Colorado (Supreme Court of the United States 1964)

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 of the Court

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 to the Supreme Court of Colorado for consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353.

Dissenting Opinion

Mr. Justice Harlan,

dissenting.

For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Smith v. Crouse, ante, p. 584, I would set this case for argument.

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