Smith v. Crouse
Opinion
378 U.S. 584 (1964)
SMITH
v.
CROUSE, WARDEN.
No. 915, Misc.
Supreme Court of United States.
Decided June 22, 1964. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.
Petitioner pro se.
William M. Ferguson, Attorney General of Kansas, and J. Richard Foth, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is reversed. Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353 .
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting.
In my opinion the question whether Douglas v. California, 372 U. S. 353 , should be given retroactive application is deserving of plenary consideration. Cf. my dissenting opinion in LaVallee v. Durocher, 377 U. S. 998 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 52 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.