author: Per Curiam. Mr. Justice Harlan,

text:
    REDRUP v. NEW YORK.
    No. 3.
    Argued October 10, 1966.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Sam Bosenwein argued the cause for petitioner in No. 3. With him on the briefs were Stanley Fleishman and Osmond K. Fraenkel. Mr. Fleishman argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner in No. 16. Emanuel Redfield argued the cause and filed briefs for appellants in No. 50.

      H. Richard Uviller argued the cause for respondent in No. 3. With him on the brief were Frank S. Hogan and Alan F. Scribner. John B. Browning, Assistant Attorney General of Kentucky, argued the cause for respondent in No. 16. With him on the brief was Robert Matthews, Attorney General. Fletcher Jackson, Assistant Attorney General of Arkansas, argued the cause for appellee in No. 50. With him on the brief were Bruce Bennett, Attorney General, H. Clcy Robinson, Assistant Attorney General, and Jack L. Lessenberry.

      Morris B. Abram and Jay Greenfield filed briefs for the Council for Periodical Distributors Associations, Inc., as amicus curiae, urging reversal in all three cases. Horace S. Manges filed a brief for American Book Publishers Council, Inc., as amicus curiae, urging reversal in No: 50.

      Charles H. Keating, Jr., and James J. Clancy filed briefs for Citizens for Decent Literature, Inc., as amicus curiae, urging affirmance in Nos. 3 and 16.

       Together with No. 16, Austin v. Kentucky, on certiorari to the Circuit Court of McCracken County, Kentucky, argued on October 10-11, 1966, and No. 50, Gent et al. v. Arkansas, on appeal from the Supreme Court of Arkansas, argued October 11, 1966.

   Per Curiam.

These three cases arise from a recurring conflict — the conflict between asserted state power to suppress the distribution of books and .magazines through criminal or civil proceedings, and the guarantees of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

I.

In No. 3, Redrup v. New York, the petitioner was a clerk at. a New York City newsstand. A plainclothes patrolman approached the newsstand, saw two paperback books on a -rack — Lust Pool, and Shame Agent — and asked for them by name. . The petitioner handed him the books and collected the price of $1.65. As a result of this transaction, the petitioner was charged in the New York City Criminal Court with violating a state criminal law. He was convicted, and the conviction was affirmed on appeal.

In No. 16, Austin v. Kentucky, the petitioner owned and operated á retail bookstore and newsstand in Paducah, Kentucky. A woman resident of Paducah purchased two magazines from a salesgirl in the. petitioner’s store,.after asking for them by name — High Heels, and Spree. As a result of this transaction the petitioner stands convicted in the Kentucky courts for violating a criminal law of that State.

In No. 50, Gent v. Arkansas, the prosecuting attorney of the Eleventh Judicial District of Arkansas brought a civil proceeding under a state statute, to have certain issues of various magazines declared obscene, to enjoin their distribution and-to obtain a judgment ordering their surrender and destruction. The magazines proceeded against were: Gent, Swank, Bachelor, Modern Man, Cavalcade, Gentleman, Ace, and Sir. The County Chancery Court entered the requested judgment after a trial with an advisory jury, and the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed, with minor modifications.

In none of the cases was there a claim that the statute in question reflected a specific and limited state concern for juveniles. See Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U. S. 158; cf. Butler v. Michigan, 352 U. S. 380. In none was there any suggestion of an assault upon individual privacy by publication in a manner so obtrusive as to make it impossible for an unwilling individual to avoid exposure to it. Cf. Breard v. Alexandria, 341 U. S. 622; Public Utilities Comm’n v. Pollak, 343 U. S. 451. And in none was there evidence of the sort of “pandering” which the Court found significant in Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U. S. 463.

II.

The Court originally limited review in these cases to certain particularized questions, upon the hypothesis that the material involved in each case was of a character described as “obscene in the constitutional sense” in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 418. But we have concluded that the hypothesis upon which the Court originally proceeded was invalid, and accordingly that the cases can and should be decided upon a common and controlling fundamental constitutional basis, without prejudice to the questions upon which review was originally granted. We have concluded, in short, that the distribution of the publications in each of these cases is protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments from governmental suppression, whether criminal or civil, in personam or in rem.

Two members of the Court have consistently adhered to the view that a State is utterly without power to suppress, control, or punish the distribution of any writings or pictures upon the ground of their “obscenity.” A third has held to the opinion that a State’s power in this area is narrowly limited to a distinct and clearly identifiable class of material. Others have subscribed to a not dissimilar standard, holding that a State may not constitutionally inhibit the distribution of literary material as obscene unless “(a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in’sex; (b).the material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters; and (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value/’ emphasizing that the “three elements must coalesce,” and that no such material can “be proscribed unless it i§ found to be utterly without redeeming social value.” Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 418-419. Another Justice has not viewed the “social value” element as an independent factor in the judgment of obscenity. Id., at 460-462 (dissenting opinion).

Whichever of these constitutional views is brought to bear Upon the cases before us, it is clear that the judgments cannot stand. Accordingly, the judgment in each casé is reversed.

T, . , , It is so ordered.

Mr. Justice Harlan,

whom Mr. Justice Clark joins,

dissenting.

Two of these cases, Redrup v. New York and Austin v. Kentucky, were taken to consider the standards governing the application of the scienter requirement announced in Smith v. California, 361 U. S. 147, for obscenity prosecutions. There it was held thát a defendant criminally charged with purveying obscene material must be shown to have had some kind of knowledge of the character of such material; the quality of that knowledge, however, was not defined. The third case, Gent v. Arkansas, was taken to consider the validity of a comprehensive Arkansas anti-obscenity statute, in light of the doctrines of “vagueness” and “prior restraint.” The writs of certiorari in Redrup and Austin, and the notation of probable jurisdiction in Gent, were respectively limited to these issues, thus laying aside, for the purposes of these cases, the permissibility of the.state determinations as to the obscenity of the challenged publications. Accordingly, the obscenity vel non of these publications was not discussed in the briefs or oral arguments of any of the parties.

The three cases were argued together at the beginning of this Term. Today, the Court rules that the materials could not constitutionally be adjudged obscene by the States, thus rendering adjudication of the other issues unnecessary. In short, the Court disposes of the cases on the issue that was deliberately excluded from review, and refuses to pass on the questions that brought the cases here.

In my opinion these dispositions do not reflect well on the processes of the Court, and I think the issues for which the cases were taken should be decided. Failing that, I prefer to cast my vote to dismiss the writs in Bédrup and Austin as improvidently granted and, in the circumstances, to dismiss the appeal in Gent for lack of a substantial federal question. I deem it more appropriate to defer an expression of my own views on the questions brought here until an occasion when the Court is prepared to come to grips with such issues.

      N. Y. Pen. Law § 1141 (1).

       Ky. Rev. Stat. § 436.100. The Kentucky Court of Appeals denied plenary review of the petitioner’s conviction, the Chief Justice dissenting. 386 S. W. 2d 270.

       Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 41-2713 to 41-2728.

       239 Ark. 474, 393 S. W. 2d 219.

        Redrup v. New York, 384 U. S. 916; Austin v. Kentucky, 384 U. S. 916; Gent v. Arkansas, 384 U. S. 937.

       In each cf the cases before us, the contention that the publications involved were basically protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments was timely but unsuccessfully asserted in the state proceedings. In each of these cases, this contention was properly and explicitly presented for review here.

       See Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U. S. 463, 476, 482 (dissenting opinions); Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U. S. 184, 196 (concurring opinion); Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 508 (dissenting opinion).

       See Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U. S. 463, 499, and n. 3 (dissenting opinion). See also Magrath, The Obscenity Cases: Grapes of Roth, 1966 Supreme Court Review 7, 69-77.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: Per Curiam. Mr. Justice Douglas,

license: Public Domain

text:
    TURNER et al. v. NEW YORK.
    No. 399.
    Argued April 12-13, 1967.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Osmond K. Fraenkel argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioners.

      H. Richard Uviller argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Frank S. Hogan.

   Per Curiam.

The writ is dismissed as improvidently granted.

Mr. Justice Douglas,

with whom Mr. Justice Fortas concurs,

dissenting.

This case arose out of an assembly in Duffy Square, New York City, protesting American policy in Vietnam. After a few minutes of speeches, the police dispersed the crowd, utilizing' two policemen on horseback and a dozen patrolmen.

The complaint charged disorderly conduct,

“in that with intent to provoke a breach of the peace and under circumstances whereby a breach of the peace might be occasioned, the defendants did unlawfully congregate and assemble at the above location obstructing the area to the exclusion of those wishing to use same, and did delay vehicular traffic while carrying placards and using loud and boisterous language; by their actions did cause a crowd to collect; [w]hen ordered to move on the defendants did fail to do so, after being informed that their actions were not lawful.”

The evidence showed that the meeting was peaceful and orderly until the horses arrived. Up to that time' the crowd was apparently small with no one paying much attention. The bulk of the evidence at the trial related to acts of individual petitioners during the period when-the police were trying to disperse the crowd, that is, between the advent of the horses and the arrests. After the appearance by the police, there was a minor disturbance, one person hitting a horse with a rolled-up cardboard placard, one biting a policeman, and one lying down. But these acts were not charged in the complaint. While no opinion was written by the trial court, the Appellate Term did write and in its opinion relied heavily on these post-dispersion facts to justify the convictions. 48 Misc. 2d 611, 613-618, 619, 265 N. Y. S. 2d 841, 843-847, 849. But as stated by Judge Hofstadter-in dissent:

“The occurrences now offered as a basis for upholding the convictions were not the subject of the com- . plaint charged. And the events, including any alleged disturbance by any defendant, ensuing upon the order, were the direct and immediate issue of a; misconception by the police of the lawful warrant and scope of their authority.” 48 Misc. 2d, at 630, 265 N. Y. S. 2d, at 860.

A conviction on one ground may not be sustained on grounds that might have been charged but were not. “It is as much a violation of due process to send an accused to prison following conviction of a charge on which he was never tried as it would be to convict bim upon a charge that was never made.” Cole v. Arkansas, 333 U. S. 196, 201. And see Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 382 U. S. 87; Ashton v. Kentucky, 384 U. S. 195.

Likewise a conviction “upon a charge not made” is not consistent with due process. De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U. S. 353, 362.

Where First Amendment rights are involved, as they were here, we have been meticulous to insist upon clean-cut violations of ordinances protecting law and order, lest broad or fuzzy applications be used to suffocate or impair the exercise of those constitutional rights. Stromberg v. California, 283 U. S. 359, 369; Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U. S. 229, 237; Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U. S. 536, 551-552; Ashton v. Kentucky, supra, at 200-201.

Issues of that character and gravity are tendered here and I would resolve them.


author: Per Curiam.

text:
    OSCAR GRUSS & SON v. UNITED STATES et al.
    No. 1060.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Myron S. Isaacs, for appellant.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert W. Ginnane and Jerome Nelson for the United States et al., Hugh B. Cox and Henry P. Sailer for the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. et al., and Joseph Auerbach for Smith et al., appellees.
   Per Curiam.

Appellant is a bondholder of the New York, New Haven &.Hartford Railroad Company (the New Haven), which is now undergoing a reorganization under § 77 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U. S. C. § 205. On April 6, 1966, the Interstate Commerce Commission directed inclusion of the New Haven in the merger of the New York Central Railroad Company and the Pennsylvania Railroad Company as soon as terms and conditions could be settled, but approved the Penn-Central merger and authorized its consummation prior to such inclusion. Appellant then petitioned the Commission to reconsider this order. The Commission allowed appellant to intervene but denied the petition to reconsider, and appellant then challenged the Commission’s order of April 6 in the District Court, which dismissed the complaint on the ground, among others, that appellant lacked standing to attack the Penn-Central merger. Since that time this Court has reviewed other aspects of the Commission’s order approving the merger ¿nd has directed a remand to the Commission for further proceedings. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. United States, ante, p. 372. Since the order which appellant’s suit attacked is now subject to further consideration by the Commission and since proceedings to achieve inclusion of the New.Haven are also under way before the Commission, it appears inappropriate to review the decision of the District Court at this time. Rather, we vacate the order of the. District Court and remand the case , to that court. Should appellant still be dissatisfied with the ultimate order of the Commission in the merger proceedings, it may attempt a fresh challenge in the District Court..

It is so ordered.


text:
    ARMORED CARRIER CORP. v. UNITED STATES et al.
    No. 1011.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      J. Kevin Mur-phy for appellant.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Robert W. Ginncme and Nahum, Litt for the United States et al., and Seymour D. Lewis for B. D. C. Corp., appellees.
   Per Curiam.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.


text:
    FIFTH AVENUE COACH LINES, INC., et al. v. CITY OF NEW YORK.
    No. 1095.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Jesse Climenko for appellants.

      J. Lee Rankin for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The -motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


text:
    CALLENDER v. NEW YORK.
    No. 1103.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Carl Rachlin for appellant.

      Frank S. Hogan for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.


text:
    LAVERNE v. PIRANESI IMPORTS, INC.
    No. 1114.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Monroe H. Freedman for appellant.

      Leon, Dicker for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The motion to. dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.


text:
    MONTIETH v. OREGON.
    No. 1459,
    Misc.
    Decided May 8, 1967.

      Howard R. Lonergan for appellant.
   Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.


text:
    January 26, 1967.
    No. 82.
    Hodes et al. v. United States.

      Samuel Kirshenbaum for Hodes et al. and Martin Schlesinger for Mid-City Park View Apartments, Inc., petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. (Certiorari granted, 384 U. S. 968.) Writ of certiorari dismissed pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    January 30, 1967.
    No. 585.
    Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp. et al.

      Richard F. Watt for petitioner.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    February 13, 1967.
    No. 574,
    October Term, 1963.
    Williamson et al., Executors v. Peurifoy, Judge.
   C. A. 5th Cir. (Certiorari denied, 375 U. S. 967; 376 U. S. 960.) Motion to recall, vacate and amend the order of this Court dated January 6, 1964, denied.


text:
    No. 29,
    No. 952.
    Original.
    Texas et al. v. Colorado; and Protective Committee for Independent Stockholders of TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc. v. Anderson, Trustee in Bankruptcy.
   C. A. 5th Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to filé a brief expressing the views of the United States in each of these cases.


text:
    No. 18,
    Original.
    Illinois v. Missouri.
   It is ordered that the Honorable Harvey M. Johnsen, Senior Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, be, and he is hereby appointed Special Master in this case in place of the Honorable Sam E. Whitaker, resigned. The Special Master shall have authority to fix the time and conditions for filing of additional pleadings and to direct subsequent proceedings, and authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The Master is directed to submit such reports as he may deem appropriate.

The Master shall be allowed his actual expenses. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, the cost of printing his report, and all other proper expenses shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct.

It is further ordered that if the position of Special Master in this case becomes vacant during a recess of the Court, The Chief Justice shall have authority to make a new. designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.

[For earlier orders herein, see 379 U. S. 952; 380 U. S. 901, 969; 382 U. S. 803, 1022; 384 U. S. 924.].


text:
    No. 463.
    Udall, Secretary of the Interior v. Federal Power Commission et al.
    On the motion were Solicitor General Marshall for petitioner and for respondent Federal Power Commission, and William H. Dempsey, Jr., for respondents Pacific Northwest Power Co. et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385 U. S. 927.) Joint motion to remove case from summary calendar granted.


text:
    No. 216.
    National Labor Relations Board v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co. et al.

      Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., John Silard and Stephen I. Schlossberg on the motion.
   C. A. 7th Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385 U. S. 810.) Motion of International Union, UAW-AFL-CIO (Locals 248 and 401), to participate-in oral argument granted and fifteen minutes allotted for that purpose. The other respondent also allotted an additional fifteen minutes for oral argument.


text:
    No. 371.
    Crown Coat Front Co. Inc. v. United States.

      Graham W. McGowan on the motion. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States in opposition. to the motion.
   C. A. 2d Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385 U. S. 811.) Motion of Electronic Industries. Association for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition granted.


text:
    No. 391.
    State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. et al. v. Tashire et al.

      Mark C. Mc-Clanahan for Anderson & Geary et al., as. amici curiae, in support of the petition, on the motion.
   C. A. 9th Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385 U. S. 811.) Motion of Anderson & Geary et al. for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, granted.


text:
    No. 480.
    Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden.

      Francis B. Burch, Attorney General of Maryland, and Franklin Goldstein, Assistant Attorney General, on the motion.
   C. A. 4th Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385. U. S. 926.) Motion of petitioner to remove case from summary calendar denied.


text:
    No. 1093,
    Misc.
    Skolnick v. Parsons, U. S. District Judge, et al.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 851,
    Misc.
    Schack v. Florida et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Earl Fair doth, Attorney General of Florida, and George R. Georgieff, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied. Treating the papers submitted as &• petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.

The following motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas dissents.


text:
    No. 1,
    Misc.
    Williams v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, Stanton Stone, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, Gilbert J. Pena and Alio B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.


text:
    No. 11,
    Misc.
    Taylor v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Lonny F. Zwiener, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.


text:
    No. 74,
    No. 116,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Stephens v. Beto, Corrections Director; and Smith v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioners pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Charles B. Swanner and Howard M. Fender, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent in both cases.


text:
    No. 238,
    No. 1206,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Beck v. Beto, Corrections Director. Skolnick v. Campbell, U. S. District Judge.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and other relief denied.


text:
    No. 1346,
    Misc.
    In re Disbarment of Rekeweg.
   It is ordered that Wilmer D. Rekeweg of Paulding, Ohio, be suspended from the practice'of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within forty days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 931,
    No. 1084,
    No. 1095,
    No. 1098,
    No. 1101,
    No. 1124,
    Sliva v. Rundle, Correctional Superintendent; Ring v. Superintendent, California Medical Facility, et al.; Lorenzana v. Warden, San Juan District Jail; Eidinoff v. Kreimeyer, Acting State Hospital Superintendent, et al.; Boucher v. Preston et al.; and Stewart v. California.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
   Motions for leave to .file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 1064,
    No. 1072,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Campbell v. United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit et al.; and Gordon v. Massachusetts.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 1074,
    Misc.
    Soots et ux. v. Attorney General of the United States.
    Petitioners pro se. .Solicitor General .Marshall for. respondent.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 965,
    Misc.
    Putt v. United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor Genéral Marshall, Assistant • Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondents.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of prohibition and/or mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 760.
    United States v. Penn-Olin Chemical Co. et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner and Edwin M. Zimmerman for the-United States. William S. Potter, Albert R. Connelly and H. Francis DeLone for appellees.
   Appeal from D. C. Del. Probable jurisdiction noted:


text:
    No. 754.
    Whitehill v. Elkins, President, University of Maryland, et al.

      Sanford Jay Rosen, Arnold M. Weiner and Joseph S. Kaufman for appellant. Robert C. Murphy, Attorney General of Maryland, and Loring E. Hawes and Julius A. Romano, Assistant Attorneys General,- for appellees.
   Appeal from D. C. Md. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 810.
    Zwickler v. Koota, District Attorney of County of Kings.

      Emanuel Redfield for appellant. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, for appellee.
   Appeal from D. C. E. D. N. Y. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 838.
    Wyandotte Transportation Co. et al. v. United States.

      Lucian Y. Ray and Benjamin W. Yancey for Wyandotte Transportation Co., George B. Matthews for Union Barge Line Corp;, and Tom F. Phillips for Cargill, Inc., et al., petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Sanders and Alan S. Rosenthal for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 424.
    Mempa v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.

      Donald A., Schmechel for petitioner. John J. O’Connell, Attorney General of Washington, and Stephen C. Way, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 734.
    Walkling v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.

      Donald A. Schmechel for petitioner. John J. O’Connell, Attorney General of Washington, and Stephen C. Way, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari granted and case set for oral argument immediately following No., 424.


text:
    No. 789.
    Federal Trade Commission v. Fred Meyer, Inc., et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner and James Mcl. Henderson for petitioner. Edward F. Howrey, Terrence C. Sheehy. and George W. Mead for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Petition for writ of certio-rari granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition which reads as follows: “1, Whether a supplier’s granting to a retailer who buys directly from.it promotional allowances that are not made available to a wholesaler who resells to retailers competing with the direct-buying retailer violates Section 2 (d) of thé Robinson-Patman Act.”


text:
    No. 892.
    International Longshoremen’s Association, Local 1291 v. Philadelphia Marine Trade Association.

      Abraham E. Freedman and Martin J. Vigderman for petitioner. Francis A. Scánlan for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 703.
    Fred Meyer, Inc., et al. v. Federal Trade Commission.

      Edward F. Howrey, Terrence C. Sheehy and George W. Mead for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner and James Mel. Henderson for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 766.
    Jakob v. United States.

      William R. Glendon for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C.. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 791.
    Wallerstein et al. v. Federal Communications Commission.

      Madison B. Graves and Robert W. Hughes for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Henry Geller, John H. Conlin and Lenore G. Ehrig for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 796.
    Crane Boom Life Guard Co., Inc., et al. v. Saf-T-Boom Corp. et al.

      Osro Cobb for petitioners. Wayne W. Owen for respondents.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 829.
    Central Illinois Public Service Co. v. United States.

      Elmer Nafziger for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall,. Assistant Attorney General W‘0isl, S. Billingsley Hill'and Robert M. Perry; for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 844.
    Russo v. Virginia.

      Stuart A. Barbour, Jr., for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. App. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 855.
    Broussard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

      J. Minos Simon for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 857.
    Marx v. Jaffe.

      Louis Asarnow for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied^


text:
    No. 862.
    Magnus v. United States.

      Boris Kostelanetz, Eugene Gressman and Louis Bender for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Joseph M. Howard for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 864.
    McMillan v. United States.

      Henry A. Lowenberg for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. May sack for the United Sta't'es.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 877.
    Davis v. United States.

      Charles Fuller Blanchard for peti-tionér. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States:
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 878.
    Rawdon v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 880.
    Kennedy, Treasurer of Arizona, et al. v. Powell, Trustee in Bankruptcy.

      Darrell F. Smith, Attorney General of Arizona, and John V. Riggs, Assistant Attorney General, for. petitioners Kennedy et al. Louise C. W. Powell, respondent, pro se. ■ Briefs amicus curiae, in support of the petition, were filed by: Boston E. Witt, Attorney. General, and George Richard Schmitt, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of New Mexico; Forrest H. Anderson, Attorney General, and Donald D. MacPherson, Special Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Montana; William B, Saxbe, Attorney General, and Charles S. Lopeman, Chief Counsel, for the State of Ohio; Earl Faircloth, Attorney General, and T: T. Turnbull and Larry Levy, Assistant .Attorneys General, for the State of Florida; and John J. O’Connell, Attorney General,, and Edward B. Mackie, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Washington. A brief amicus curiae, in support of the petition, was filed by the Attorneys General for their respective Statés as follows: Richmond M. Flowers of Alabama, Bruce Bennett of Arkansas, Thomas C. Lynch of California, David P. Buckson of Delaware,. Bert T. Kobayashi of Hawaii, Allan G. Shepard of Idaho, Jack P. F. Gremillion of Louisiana, James S. Erwin of Maine, Francis Burch of Maryland, Frank J. Kelley, of Michigan, Harvey Dickerson of Nevada, Thomas Wade Bruton of North Carolina, Helgi Johanneson of North Dakota, Charles Nesbitt of Oklahoma, Edward Friedman of Pennsylvania, Daniel R. McLeod of South Carolina, Frank L. Farrar of South Dakota, George F. McCanless of Tennesseé, Phil L. Hansen of Utah, Robert Y. Button of Virginia and- John F. Raper of Wyoming.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 889.
    Smith v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 874.
    Marshall v. Russell, Executrix, et al.

      G. Hughel Harrison and Thomas M„. Odom for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 882.
    Wright v. Press Publishing Co. et al.

      Walter C. Wright, Jr., petitioner, pro se. Said W. Arkus and Harry Green for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 887.
    United States Rubber Co. v. Underwater Storage, Inc.

      Robert F. Conrad and Harvey E. Bumgardner, Jr., for petitioner. Robert E. Sher and Abraham J. Harris for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied,


text:
    No. 890.
    Gray v. North Carolina.
    Petitioner pro se. Thomqs Wade Bruton, Attorney General of North Carolina, and Theodore C. Brown, Jr., for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 897.
    Irish, dba Russell L. Irish Investments v. Securities and Exchange Commission.

      Harvey Erickson for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Philip. A. Loomis, David Ferber and Edward B. Wagner for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 851.
    Miller v. United States.

      Marvin M. Karpat-kin and Osmond K. Fraenkel for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice-Rosénberg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 898.
    Yates et al. v. Hodges et ux.

      Malcolm B. Montgomery for petitioners. W. H. Jolly for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 900.
    Root v. United States.

      Morris Lavine for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 901.
    De Lucia v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

      Jack Wasserman and David CarlinerHor petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Gharles Gordon for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 902.
    Travel Consultants, Inc. v. Travel Management Corp.

      Worth Rowley and Lenox G. Cooper for petitioner. Luden Bilmer and J. H. Krug for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 907.
    Marbro Food Service, Inc., dba Fab’s Famous Foods Co. v. National Labor Relations Board.

      Clement John Murphy, Jr., for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 926.
    Bethlehem Steel Co. et al. v. United States.

      Ahraham J. Harris and Marvin J.. Coles for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Sanders and Alan S. Rosenthal for the United States.
   C. C. P. A. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 908.
    Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Guarantee Reserve Life Insurance Co. of Hammond et al.

      William T. Kirby for petitioner. Claude A. Roth for respondents.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 912.
    Ray v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 913.
    Zamora v. United States.

      Quincy D. Adams for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Anthony P. Nugent, Jr., for the United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 917.
    Roofire Alarm Co. v. Underwriters’ Laboratories, Inc.

      John A. Chambliss for petitioner. Jere T. Tipton and Edward H. Hickey for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 919.
    Friedman v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 920.
    Bloomfield Steamship Co. v. Haight et al.

      Robert Eikel for petitioner. Benjamin W. Yancey for respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 924.
    Gajewski et al. v. United States.
    Petitioners pro se.5 Solicitor General Marshall for the United States. .
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 922.
    Matanuska Valley Lines, Inc. v. Molitor.

      Edgar Paul Boyko for petitioner.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 923.
    Jefferson Construction Co. of Florida v. United States.

      Carl A. Hiaasen for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 935.
    Clark v. Ohio.

      John W. Reece for petitioner. James V. Barbuto and Stephan M. Gabalac for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 955.
    Young & Co. of Houston v. Calvert, Comptroller of Public Accounts of Texas.

      Robert Eikel for petitioner. Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, George; M. Cowden, First Assistant Attorney General, and John R. Grace and Kerns B. Taylor, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Civ. App. Tex., 3d Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 870.
    No. 871.
    Curtis et al. v. Boeger, Warden; and Grand et al. v. Boeger, Warden.

      Charles R. Oldham, for petitioners in both cases. Thomas F. McGuire, James ,J. Gallagher, Gary M. Gaertner and Allen J. Roth for respondent in both cases.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 916.
    Hobson et al. v. Gasch, U. S. District Judge.
    Petitioners pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir.. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 939.
    Lafargue et vir v. Samuel et al.

      John D. Lambert, Jr., for petitioners. Thomas L. Stennis II for respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 906.
    Harris v. United States.
    Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted. Lawrence F. O’Donnell for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 854.
    Valrie v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 868.
    Smith v. Industrial Accident Commission of California et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Everett A. Corten for respondent Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion to dispense with printing petition, and motion of respondent Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board (formerly Industrial Accident Commission) to dispense with printing its brief, granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 888.
    Harrah’s Club v. National Labor Relations Board.

      Nathan R. Berke for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent. David H. Mendelsohn for Nevada Resort Association et al., as amici curiae, in support of the petition.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of Nevada Resort Association et al. for leave to file a brief, as amici curiae, granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 921.
    Otten v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

      H. Gordon Davis for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 883.
    Alabama et al. v. Bell.

      Richmond M. Flowers, Attorney General of Alabama, and John C. Tyson III, Assistant Attorney General, for petitioners. Respondent pro se.

   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of respondent for the appointment of counsel denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 936.
    Clarke, Chief Judge, U. S. District Court v. Yax.

      Lyndol L. Young for petitioner. Munson H. Lane for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 29,
    Misc.
    Pohlabel v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson,, Beatrice Rosenberg, and Robert G. May sack for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 204,
    Misc.
    Parker v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General .Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Robert S. Erdahl and Kirby W. Patterson for the United
    States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 957,
    Misc.
    Dickerson v. Rundle, Correctional Superintendent.

      Walter Stein for petitioner.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 364,
    Misc.
    Jones v. Comstock, Superintendent, et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Doris H. Maier, Assistant Attorney General, and Daniel J. Kremer, Deputy Attorney General, for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 387,
    Misc.
    Lynott v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 594,
    Misc.
    Burnett v. Wisconsin.

      Lloyd A. Barbee. for petitioner. Bronson C. La Follette, Attorney, General of Wisconsin, and William A. Platz and Betty R. Brown, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 603,
    Misc.
    Brown v. Florida.

      John D. Buchanan, Jr., and Joseph C. Jacobs for petitioner. Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Jarfies G. Mahomer, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 701,
    Misc.
    Bennett v. United States.

      Leon Pólsky for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 712,
    Misc.
    Bullard v. North Carolina.

      Daniel H. Pollitt for petitioner. T. W. Bruton, Attorney General of North Carolina, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 704,
    Misc.
    Candelario v. California.
    Petitioner pro se. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Edsel W. Haws and Roger E. Venturi, Deputy Attorneys General, and Doris H. Maier, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 714,
    Misc.
    Coke v. United States.

      Leon Polsky for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Marshall Tamor Golding for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 852,
    Misc.
    Reed v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United. States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 861,
    Misc.
    Wright v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 877,
    No. 886,
    Misc.
    Mise.
    Copley v. United States; and Roseman v. United States.

      Luke McKissack for petitioner in No; 877, Mise., and William C. Wunsch for petitioner in No. 886, Mise. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn Hamburg for the United States in both eases.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 964,
    Misc.
    Viveiros v. State Board of Education et al.
   Sup. Ct. R. I. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 945,
    Misc.
    Bennett v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and

      Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 959,
    Misc.
    Woodruff v. Mississippi.

      Melvin L. Wulf and Alvin J. Bronstein for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 962,
    Misc.
    Goldberg v. United States.

      Robert M. Taylor and George P. Walker for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Ragovin and Gilbert E. Andrews for the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 973,
    Misc.
    Parness v. United States.

      Leon B. Polsky and Meredith Hemphill, Jr., for petitioner.. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 977,
    Misc.
    Ruckle v. Warden, Baltimore City Jail.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 978,
    Misc.
    Ruckle v. Warden, Baltimore City Jail.
   Baltimore City Ct., Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 990,
    Misc.
    Rasmussen v. Willingham, Warden.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1000,
    Misc.
    Berry v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 4th Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 979,
    Misc.
    Vanella v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 991,
    Misc.
    Black v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General. Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1001,
    Misc.
    Lujan v. California.
   Dist. Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1002,
    Misc.
    Murray v. Wilson, Warden, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1006,
    Misc.
    Harbold v. Rundle, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1009,
    Misc.
    Floyd v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1012,
    Misc.
    Willoughby v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1014,
    Misc.
    Preston v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1016,
    Misc.
    Jacobs v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1008,
    Misc.
    Smith v. Oliver, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1017,
    Misc.
    Acosta v. United States.

      Jerry T. Batts for petitioner. Solicitor General~Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1018,
    Misc.
    Juneau v. Allgood, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1019,
    Misc.
    Beadle v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1020,
    Misc.
    Zucker v. California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1026,
    Misc.
    McCaulley v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1028,
    Misc.
    Parra v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1033,
    Misc.
    Figaratto v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1034,
    Misc.
    Richardson v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1036,
    Misc.
    Conway v. California Adult Authority.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied;


text:
    No. 1037,
    Misc.
    Clemons v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1038,
    Misc.
    Hanshaw v. Eyman, Warden, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1039,
    Misc.
    Eidenmueller v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1040,
    Misc.
    Nelms v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.'
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1041,
    Misc.
    Cramer v. Cavell, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1045,
    Misc.
    Dallas v. Florida.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1046,
    Misc.
    McCreary v. Wilson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1047,
    Misc.
    White v. California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1048,
    Misc.
    Bellam v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1049,
    Misc.
    Walker v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1053,
    Misc.
    Stiltner v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent, et al.
   Super. Ct. Wash., Walla Walla County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1054,
    Misc.
    Banks v. California.
   Dist. Ct. App. Cal., 5th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1056,
    Misc.
    Hoptowit v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1057,
    Misc.
    Reed v. California.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1058,
    Misc.
    Anderson v. Frye, Warden.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1061,
    Misc.
    Ellis et vir v. Harada et al.

      Joseph A. Ryan for petitioners.
   Sup. Ct. Hawaii. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1062,
    Misc.
    Ellenbogen v. United States.

      Daniel H. Greenberg for petitioner. Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
   C. A. 2d. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1071,
    Misc.
    Haas v. Tahash, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Minn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1077,
    Misc.
    Staggs v. Henderson, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1079,
    Misc.
    Wooten v. Henderson, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1082,
    Misc.
    Harvey et al. v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1083,
    Misc.
    Ford v. Wilson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1086,
    Misc.
    Lewis v. Mancusi, Warden.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1087,
    Misc.
    Lee v. Mancusi, Warden.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1088,
    Misc.
    Thomas v. Wilson, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1089,
    Misc.
    Johnson v. Department of Correction et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1090,
    Misc.
    Grove v. Wilson, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1091,
    Misc.
    Lepper v. Langlois, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. R. I. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1096,
    Misc.
    Smith v. California.
   Dist. Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1099,
    Misc.
    Butler v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1102,
    Misc.
    Coleman v. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1106,
    Misc.
    Daniels v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1108,
    Misc.
    King v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1110,
    Misc.
    Pierson v. New Jersey.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1113,
    Misc.
    Gatewood v. Hendrick, County Prisons Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1114,
    Misc.
    Jackson v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1115,
    Misc.
    Heacock v. Rundle, Correctional Superintendent, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1116,
    Misc.
    Lee v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1118,
    Misc.
    Stell v. Pennsylvania.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1199,
    Misc.
    Beer v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 315,
    Misc.
    Johnson v. Florida.
    Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted. Phillip A. Hubbart for petitioner. Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and James T. Carlisle and Arden M. Siegendorf, Assistant Attorneys General, for
    respondent.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 863,
    Misc.
    Kyle v. Wickersham et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion to substitute Elizabeth S. Wickersham in place of Cornelius, W. Wickersham, Jr., as a party respondent granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1094,
    Misc.
    Conway v. Wilson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari and other relief denied.

The following petitions for writs of certiorari are denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas would grant the petitions for writs of certiorari and reverse the judgments of the courts below for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion • of Mr. Justice Brennan in Spencer v. Texas, 385 U. S. 554, 587:


text:
    No. 2,
    Misc.
    Goodspeed v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, Eirst Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, .Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir.


text:
    No. 4,
    Misc.
    Carter v. Wilson, Warden, et al.
    Petitioner pro se: Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Deráld E. Granberg and John F. Kraetzer, Deputy Attorneys General, for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir.


text:
    No. 5,
    Misc.
    Breen v. Beto, Corrections Director.

      Richard Tinsman for petitioner. Wag- . goner Carr, Attorney' General .of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Gilbert J.^Pena, Assistant Attorneys General, for "respondent.
   C. A. 5th. Cir.


text:
    No. 7,
    Misc.
    Stanley, alias Saunders v. New York.

      Ephraim London for petitioner. Frank S. Hogan for respondent.
   Ct. App. N. Y.


text:
    No. 16,
    Misc.
    Wagoner v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and J. Milton Richard

      son and Howard M. Fender, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 17,
    Misc.
    Warden v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hav)thorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Lonny F. Zwiener, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 21,
    No. 77,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Taylor v. Texas. Fairris v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Gilbert J. Pena, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.

Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 403,
    Misc.
    Stockwell v. Beto, Corrections Director, et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney-General, T. B. Wright, .Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Lonny F. Zwiener-, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondents.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 530,
    Misc.
    Clark v. Beto, Corrections Director.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, and Howard M. Fender, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir.

The following petitions for writs of certiorari are denied.

The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Fortas would grant the petitions for writs of certiorari and reverse the judgments of the courts below for the reasons stated in the opinion of The Chief Justice in Spencer v. Texas, 385 U. S. 554, 569.


text:
    No. 6.
    Howard v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, Gilbert J. Pena and Charles B. Swanner, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 8,
    Misc.
    Lott v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas; Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Alio B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim App. Tex.


text:
    No. 13,
    Misc.
    Stoneham v. Texas.

      Charles E. Benson for petitioner. Reported below: 389 S. W. 2d 468.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 14,
    Misc.
    Capuchino v. Texas.

      Clyde W. W.oody and Marian S. Rosen for petitioner. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, and Howard M.' Fender and Charles B. -Swanner,. Assistant' Attorneys General, for respondent. Reported below: 389 S. W. 2d 296. ‘
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 59,
    Misc.
    Fletcher v. Texas.

      Charles E. Benson for petitioner. Reported below: 396 S. W. 2d 393.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 84,
    Misc.
    Abel v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender and Gilbert J. Pena, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 109,
    Misc.
    Booker v. Illinois.

      Richard F. Watt for petitioner. William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, and Richard A. Michael, Assistant .Attorney General, for respondent. Reported below: 34 Ill. 2d 16, 213 N. E. 2d 542.
   Sup. Ct. Ill.


text:
    No. 718,
    Misc.
    Gamez v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 590,
    Misc.
    Platt v. Texas.

      William E. Gray, for petitioner. Waggoner. Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips,' First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Howard M. Fender, and Alio B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 740.
    No. 767.
    No. 784,
    No. 824,
    No. 869,
    No. 997,
    No. 998,
    Marina Mercante Nicaraguense, S. A., as owner of The El Saldavor v. McAllister Brothers, Inc., as owner of The Tug Russell No. 18, et al., Nave v. City of Seattle, Todd v. United States, Newell v. Page, Warden, Ebell v. McGee et al., Steppe v. Florida, Kinderman v. Tahash, Warden,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
   385 U. S. 1005;

385 U. S. 450;

385 U. S. 994;

385 U. S. 1015;

385 U. S. 1017;

385 U. S. 1031; and

385 U. S. 998. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 453.
    Ruth v. Blue River Constructors et al.,
   385 U. S. 920, 984. Motion for leave to file second petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 622.
    Soape et ux. v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. et al.,
   385 U. S. 970. Motion for leave to dispense with printing petition for rehearing granted. Petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 690.
    Martin v. Phillips Petroleum Co. et al.,
   385 U. S. 991. Motion to defer consideration and for leave to supplement petition denied. Petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 665,
    No. 853,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Webb v. Beto, Corrections Director, Pope v. Parker, Warden, et al.,
   385 U. S. 940; and

385 U. S. 944. Motions for l§ave to file petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    February 14, 1967.
    No. 572,
    Misc.
    Ruby v. Texas.

      William M. Kunstler, Sam Houston Clinton, Jr., Sol A. Dann and Elmer Gertz on the motion.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed pursuant to Rule 60, of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    February 20, 1967.
    No. 1128,
    No. 1140,
    No. 1147,
    No. 1161,
    No. 1184,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Hitchcock v. Arizona et al.; Bryans v. United States; Gilchrist v. Florida; Loftis v. Eyman, Warden, et al.; and Brabson v. Mancusi, Warden.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 891.
    Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co. et al. v. Hoisting & Portable Engineers Local Union No. 701 et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. The Solicitor General is invited, to file a brief expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 1148,
    Misc.
    Wright v. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied. Treating the papers submitted as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 929.
    Massachusetts v. Painten.

      Edward W. Brooke, Attorney General of Massachusetts, and Willie J. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, for petitioner.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 56,
    Misc.
    Burgett v. Texas.
    Petitioner pro se. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Charles B. Swanner and Howard M. Fender, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Case transferred to appellate docket.


text:
    No. 817.
    Holt et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      William Howard Payne for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Robert N. Anderson and Carolyn R. Just for respondent.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 819.
    Patterson v. United States.

      Frank B. Stow for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 842.
    No. 960.
    Black, Administrator v. United States et al.; and Allen, Executrix, et al. v. Mathiasen’s Tanker Industries, Inc., et al.

      William Warner for petitioner in No. 842, and Abraham E. Freedman and Martin J. Vigderman for petitioners in No. 960. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Sanders, David L. Rose and Robert V. Zener for respondent United States in both cases.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 845.
    No. 849.
    No. 852.
    Continental Baking Co. v. Federal Trade Commission; Langendorf United Bakeries, Inc., et al. v. Federal Trade Commission; and Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission.

      John H. Schafer and James V. Siena for petitioner in No. 845; Herbert S. Little for petitioners in No. 849; and Robert W. Graham for petitioner in No. 852. Solicitor General Marshall/ Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, James Mcl. Henderson and Daniel H. Hans-com for respondent in all three cases.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 941.
    Maness et ux. v. United States.

      Hugh R. Dowling for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Joseph Kovner for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 927.
    No. 933.
    No. 934.
    Mitsubishi International Corp. et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; China Union Lines, Ltd. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.; and Lan Jing-Chau et al. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. et al.

      Sweeney J. Doehnng for Mitsubishi International Corp. et al., petitioners in No. 927 and respondents in No. 933. Robert Eikel for petitioner in No. 933. Newton B. Schwartz for petitioners in No. 934. Bryan F. Williams, Jr., and Carl O. Bue, Jr., for respondent A. 0. Andersen & Co. in all three cases. Leonard J. Matteson for respondent American Cyanamid Co. in Nos. 933 and 934. John V. Wheat for respondent Duncan in No. 933.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 932.
    MacIntyre v. United States.

      Frederick Bernays Wiener for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Joseph M. Howard and John P. Burke for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 943.
    Marks v. United States.

      Maurice Edelbaum for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Marshall Tamor Golding for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 729,
    Misc.
    Mayberry et al. v. Maroney, Correctional Superintendent, et al.
    Petitioners pro se. Edward Friedman, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, and Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for respondent Maroney.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 945.
    Hickey et al. v. Illinois Central Railroad

      Leonard R. Hartenfeld for petitioners. Thomas M. Thomas, Robert Mitten and William M. Rice for respondent.
   Co. Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 940.
    Wallace v. Illinois.

      Donald J. Rizzio for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 948.
    Duke v. United States.

      Robert H. Van Brunt for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 961.
    Wright, trading as Wright’s Grocery v. Masonite Corp.

      H. Gardner Hudson for petitioner. Welch Jordan for respondent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 963.
    Stucker v. College Life Insurance Co. of America.

      Arthur J. Sullivan for petitioner. John. Rabb Emison for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 782.
    Misc.
    Marion v. Harrist.
    Petitioner pro se. Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of-Texas, George M. Cowden,. First Assistant Attorney General, and R. L. (Bob) Lattimore, Howard M. Fender and Alio B. Crow, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 845,
    Misc.
    Davis v. Tubbs.
    Petitioner pro se. . Roger Arnebergh for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 854,
    Misc.
    Graves v. Wainwright.
    Petitioner pro se. Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Stanley D. Kupiszeioski, Jr., Assistant. Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 912,
    Misc.
    Parson v. Delaware.

      Irving Morris for petitioner. William Swain Lee, Deputy Attorney General of Delaware, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Del. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 952,
    Misc.
    Paz-Sierra v. United States.

      Eugene R. Anderson for petitioner. Solicitor General Mdr shall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Ronald L. Gainer for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1005,
    Misc.
    Sires v. Goodwin,
   U. S. District Judge, et al. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1055,
    Misc.
    Urbano v. Federal Bureau of Investigation et al.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1067,
    Misc.
    Mathis v. Alabama.

      Charles Morgan, Jr., for petitioner. Richmond M'. Flowers, Attorney General of Alabama, and David W. Clark, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1104,
    Misc.
    Britton v. New York.
    Petitioner pro se. John R. Heilman, Jr., for respondent.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1085,
    Misc.
    Esteban v. Chappell, Chairman, U. S. Board of Parole.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1125,
    Misc.
    Lingo v. Wilson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1127,
    Misc.
    Juarez v. California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1129,
    Misc.
    Messamore v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1131,
    Misc.
    Ferrell v. Texas.

      M. Gabriel Nahas, Jr., for petitioner.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1133,
    Misc.
    Jackson v. California.
   Dist. Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1134,
    Misc.
    Jones v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1135,
    Misc.
    Holmes v. Peyton, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1137,
    Misc.
    Thomas v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1149,
    Misc.
    Miller v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1143,
    Misc.
    Pelletier v. Parker, Warden.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn-Hamburg for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1150,
    Misc.
    Phelps v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1151,
    Misc.
    Gobie v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1153,
    Misc.
    Zurica v. California et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.

The following petitions for writs of certiorari are denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 10,
    Misc.
    Gomez v. Texas.

      Maury Maverick, Jr., for. petitioner. Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, James E. Barlow and Preston H. Dial, Jr., for respondent.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 646,
    Misc.
    Botsch v. United States.

      Solomon Z. Ferziger for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson• and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir.


text:
    No. 788,
    Misc.
    Butterwood v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson^ Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir.


text:
    No. 938,
    Mise.
    Cartwright v. Oregon.

      Lawrence A. Aschenbrenner and Howard R. Loner-gan for petitioner. George Van Hoomissen and Jacob B. Tanzer for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ore.


text:
    No. 1155,
    Misc.
    Lewis, aka Ehrlich v. Illinois et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1156,
    Misc.
    Werner v. California Department of Corrections et al.
   Sup.,Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1158,
    Misc.
    Lawrence v. Pate, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1160,
    Misc.
    Harshaw v. Michigan.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari denied.

The following petitions for writs of certiorari are denied.

The‘Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Fortas would grant the petitions and reverse the judgments of the courts below for the reasons stated in the opinion of The Chief Justice in Spencer v. Texas, 385 U. S. 554, 569.


text:
    No. 15,
    No. 1052,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Hillery v. California. Ross, aka Harrison v. Texas.

      William E. Gray for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Cal.

Ct. Crim. App. Tex.


text:
    No. 29.
    Osborn v. United States,
   385 U. S. 323. Petition for rehearing denied.

Mr. Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 666.
    Lester et al. v. United States,
   385 U. S. 1002. Motion for leave to-file supplement to petition for rehearing denied. Petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 777,
    Misc.
    Fontana v. Schneckloth, Warden, et al.,
   385 U. S. 998. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 36.
    No. 53.
    No. 758.
    No. 761.
    No. 803.
    No. 830.
    No. 841.
    No. 645,
    No. 705,
    No. 767,
    No. 982,
    Lewis v. United States, National Labor Relations Board v. C & C Plywood Corp., Nehring v. City of DeKalb et al., Littell v. Udall, Secretary of the Interior, Bafico v. Southern Pacific Co., Grace Line, Inc., et al. v. Kanton, Country Mutual Insurance Co. v. Andeen, Administrator, et al., Dodge v. Utah, Elbel v. United States, Bogart v. Traynor, Chief Justice of California, et al., Grear v. Ohio,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
   385 U. S. 206;

385 U. S. 421;

385 U. S. 453;

385 U. S. 1007;

385 U. S. 1025;

385 U. S. 1007;

385 U. S. 1036;

385 U. S. 1013;

385 U. S. 1014;

385 U. S. 451; and

385 U. S. 1031. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    February 27, 1967.
    No. 31.
    United States v. National Steel Corp. et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall for the United States, and Denman,Moody and C. Brien Dillon for National Steel Corp. et al., and B. J. Bradshaw for Brown et al., on the motion.
   Appeal from D. C. S. D. Tex. (Probable jurisdiction noted, 383 U. S. 905.) Joint motion to refer this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted and case referred to that court for consideration of the .settlement agreement.


text:
    No. 1208,
    Misc.
    House v. Circuit Court of Howard County et al.
   Ct. App. Md. Motion for leave to file petition for writ of certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 32.
    No. 33.
    No. 34.
    No. 35.
    Hoffa v. United States; Parks v. United States; Campbell v. United States; and King v. United States.

      Leonard B. Boudin for Uniformed Sanitationmen’s Association, as amicus curiae, in support of motion to vacate judgment. Morris A. Shenker, Daniel B. Maher and Joseph A. Fanelli for petitioner in No. 32, Jacques M. Schifjer for petitioner in No. 33, Cecil D. Branstetter for petitioner in No. 34, and P. D. Maktos and Harold E. Brown for petitioner in No. 35 on the motion to vacate judgment. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States in all four cases in opposition to the motion to vacate judgment.
   C. A. 6th Cir. (Decided 385 U. S. 293; rehearing denied, post, p. 951.)

Motion of Uniformed Sanitationmen’s Association for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, granted. Motion to. vacate judgment deniéd. Mr. Justice White and Mr. . Justice Fortas took ho part in the consideration or decision of these motions.


text:
    No. 806.
    Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co., Administrator v. Patterson, Administrator, et al.

      Abraham H. Freedman, Avram G. Adler and J. Willison Smith for petitioner. Norman Paul Harvey for respondents.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 967.
    Umans v. United States.

      Edward Brodsky and William Esbitt for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 975.
    Albrecht v. Herald Co., dba Globe-Democrat Publishing Co.

      Donald S. Siegel for petitioner. Lon Hooker for respondent.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 884.
    United Mine Workers of America, District 12 v. Illinois State Bar Association et al.

      Edmund Burke, Harrison Combsx Willard P. Owens and M. E: Boiarsky for petitioner. Bernard H. Bertrand for respondents. J. Albert Woll, Laurence Gold and Thomas E, Harris for American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. potion of American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations for leave to file a brief, as amicus. curiae, granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 843.
    Vanderpool v. United States.

      Ferdinand R. Goglio md Irving Frederick for. petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovm, Joseph M. Howard and John M. Brant for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 853.
    Dubin v. Ohio.
    Petitioner, pro se. Fred V. Skok and David P. Freed for respondent.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Lake County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 949.
    Estate of Steinberg v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      George T. Altman for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rógbvin, Joseph M. Howard and John P. Burke for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 872.
    Cowden et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      J. Fleet Cowden, pro se, and .for other petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Melva M. Graney for respondent.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 944.
    National Pneumatic Co. et al. v. United States.

      Harry Levine for petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall and Assistant

      Attorney General Rogovin for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 950.
    Spencer et al. v. New Orleans Terminal Co. et al.

      Irwin Rosenthal and Nathan Greenberg for petitioners. Malcolm L. Monroe and W. Graham Claytor, Jr., for respondent New Orleans Terminal Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 964.
    Hawthorne v. United States.

      Arnold M. Weiner and Sanford Jay Rosen for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 965.
    Katz et al. v. Tyler, U. S. District Judge.

      Henry Mark Holzer and Phyllis Tate Holzer for petitioners.. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 970.
    Carriaga v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

      Melvyn E. Stein.for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg, for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 973.
    Brasch v. Superior Court of California in and for the City and County of San Francisco.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 980.
    Rogers v. United States.

      Richard J. Bruckner for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 983.
    Worley et al. v. United States.

      N. Welch Morrisette, Jr., for Worley, and Harry M. Lightsey, Jr., and Charles B. Bowers for Bennett, petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Anthony P. Nugent, Jr., for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 990.
    Kaplus et al. v. Americana of Puerto Rico, Inc.

      Jack L. Cohen for petitioners. Manuel Maxwell for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 859.
    American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.

      William E. Miller, Herbert E. Forrest, Donald C. Beelar, Harold L. Russell, Paul A. Porter and Joseph M. Kittner for American Trucking Associations, Inc., ét al., and John E. Stephen for Air Transport Association of America, petitioners. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro, Henry Getter and John E. Conlin for respondents, Jack Werner and Melvin Richter for Western Union Telegraph Co., intervenor. below.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the Consideration or decision of. this petition.


text:
    No. 996.
    Brownwood Manufacturing Co. et al. v. Tanenbaum Textile Co., Inc.

      Harold B. Berman for petitioners. G. H. KeUoe, Jr., Robert M. Kennedy and Martin N. Why man for respondent.
   Ct. Civ. App. Tex., 5th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 997.
    Harrington et al. v. Texas.

      H. M. Harrington, Jr., petitioner, pro se, and for other petitioners. Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, George M. Cowden, First Assistant Attorney General, and Roger Tyler, Vince. Taylor, Harold G. Kennedy and Kerns B. Taylor, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 762.
    Kalish v. Hosier et al.

      Walter L. Gerash for petitioner. Edward J. Fillemoarth and Philip Hornbein, Jr., for respondents.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 976.
    Watkins v. United States.

      Richard E. Goriyian for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Ronald L. Gainer for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is-ef the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 1123,
    Misc.
    Johnston v. Dutton, Warden.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1130,
    Misc.
    Lawrence v. McMann, Warden.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 844,
    Misc.
    Lewis v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1024,
    Misc.
    Hagan v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1060,
    Misc.
    Coleman v. United States.

      Joseph Forer for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1066,
    Misc.
    Rivas v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Marshall Tamor Golding for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1078,
    Misc.
    Thompson v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1103,
    Misc.
    Dorsey v. Maroney, Warden.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1174,
    Misc.
    Peterson v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall- for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1122,
    Misc.
    White v. California.
   Dist. Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1132,
    Misc.
    Bragg v. Sinclair Refining Co.
    Petitioner pro se. Newell S. Boardman for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1136,
    Misc.
    Boone et al. v. Pritchett, Commissioner, et al.

      Conrad O. Pearson and William G. Pearson II for petitioners.
   Sup. Ct. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1138,
    Misc.
    Dukes v. United States.
    Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn Hamburg for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1142,
    Misc.
    Zavala v. Oliver, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1146,
    Misc.
    Hays v. California Adult Authority.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1154,
    Misc.
    Ringo v. Wingo, Warden.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1157,
    Misc.
    Bolin v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1159,
    Misc.
    Stewart v. Arkansas.

      Harold B. Anderson for petitioner. Joe Purcell, Attorney General of Arkansas, and Jack L. Lessenberry for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1162,
    Misc.
    Conover v. Herold, State Hospital Director.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1166,
    Misc.
    Hutchins v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1175,
    Misc.
    Anglin v. Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1182,
    Misc.
    Eason v. Dunbar, Corrections Director, et al.
   C. A. 9.th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1232,
    Misc.
    Walker v. Wingo, Warden.
    Petitioner pro se. Robert Matthews, Attorney General of Kentucky, and George F. Rabe, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


author: Mr. Justice Douglas:

text:
    No. 739,
    Misc.
    Pierce v. Turner, Warden.
    Petitioner pro se. Phil L. Hansen, Attorney General of Utah, for respondént.
   Sup. Ct. Utah. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas:

Denial of certiorari is proper in this cáse. I see no constitutional bar to a state court treating a petition ;for habeas corpus as a petition for rehearing where the habeas corpus petition raises, the same questions as ah earlier appeal. ’ But federal habeas corpus is not so cramped, and the petitioner can, of course, petition a federal district court for a writ of habeas corpus. The underlying question is whether the M’Nagkten test of legal insanity is a constitutionally permissible test of criminal liability in light of the contemporary state of knowledge on the problems of insanity. Should that test give way to the 128 years of experience in the fields of psychiatry and psychology since its formulation? Should it be replaced by the more sophisticated and realistic Durham test (Durham v. United States, 214 F. 2d 862) or some other test more in keeping with due process?


text:
    No. 1097,
    Misc.
    Ross v. Beto, Corrections Director.

      Donald C. Roylance for petitioner.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


author: Mr. Justice Douglas,

text:
    No. 1176,
    Mise.
    Sandoval v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas,

dissenting.

Police officers obtained warrants for the arrest of Coates and five others. They had been informed, by an informer not known to be reliable, that Coates concealed heroin and burglary loot in his home, that the house served as a narcotics headquarters, and that at least one “connection” contacted Coates there by telephone. Apparently this information had been partially corroborated by an. independent investigation implicating Coates and the others in a burglary operation. Officers stationed at the house saw Coates and a woman leave. They arrested Coates, saw puncture marks on the woman’s hands, and arrested her. A search of the woman’s person uncovered narcotics.

The police then entered Coates’ home and saw narcotics in plain view. They arrested the occupants and began an extensive search of the premises. During the search, a telephone rang and an officer answered it. A voice asked, “Is this Jessie?” The officer replied that it was. The caller said, “Man, where have you been? I’ve been waiting for you a long time. You were supposed to meet me some time ago.” The officer replied that he had been delayed and would be along in a few minutes. The caller then said, “Well, hurry up, man, I can’t stand around with this stuff in my pocket on the street. I might get picked up.” When the conversation ended, the officer asked Coates what it meant. Coates explained that he had arranged to pick up heroin from a person named Rudy, gave the police a description of Rudy and his car, and specified the meeting place. The officers rushed off to the designated place and arrested and searched petitioner, finding narcotics used at petitioner’s trial for possessing narcotics.

The California Supreme Court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest petitioner. The entry into Coates’ home was lawful because the discovery of the narcotics on the woman, together with the informant’s information and the information from the independent, investigation, gave the officers probable cause to believe that people in the house possessed narcotics. Since they were lawfully in the house the police could answer the telephone and conceal their identities in order “to learn of possible unlawful activities.” 65 Cal. 2d 303, 308, 419 P. 2d 187, 190. -The information given by Goátes was confirmed whpn the officers saw petitioner. Thus, I assume that they had probable cause to arrest and search petitioner.

While we have sustained the validity of searches of the home of a person validly arrested (Agnello v. United States, 269 U. S. 20; Harris v. United States, 331 U. S. 145; United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U. S. 56), we have stressed that the bounds of such searches are not unlimited. A search of the place where an arrest is made may be made “in order to find and seize things connected with the crime as its fruits or as the means by which it was committed, as well as weapons and other things to effect an escape from custody . . . .” Agnello v. United States, supra, at 30. Over and over again we have emphasized that, a search incident to arrest cannot be a general exploratory search, but must be narrowly confined. See, e. g., United States v. Lefkowitz, 285 U. S. 452; Harris v. United States, supra, at 152-153; United States v. Rabinowitz, supra, at 62. In those eases the search was designed to uncover fruits or instrumentalities of the crime for which the person was arrested. In this case the officer was engaged in a fishing expedition when he answered the telephone! He sought “to learn of possible unlawful activities.” 65 Cal. 2d, at 308, 419 P. 2d, at 190. And, the “possible unlawful activities” about which he was curious were not confined to those on the part of Coates or even to those of the type which gave the officers justification for entering the house. The officer who answered the telephone and used artifice was em gaged in a general, exploratory search to obtain evidence and leads incriminating anyone of any possible crime. Until the intercepted conversation, there was absolutely no lead connecting petitioner with any unlawful activity.

The permissible bounds of a search of the premises of an arrest have thus-been extended. The import of such extension is dangerous. . Police often lawfully enter a house to make an arrest. If the decision below is sustained the police are given a roving commission to do things condemned by the Fourth Amendment — as long as they remain in the home which they have taken over. They are given license to make a general, exploratory search which the Fourth Amendment was designed to prevent.

It might be argued that petitioner lacks standing to object to the unlawful police conduct. This would be on the theory that he had no possessory interest in the home subjected to the search'. It should be noted that neither the California Supreme Court nor the State relied upon petitioner’s lack of standing. We have liberally interpreted the provision of Rule 41 (e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that a defendant must be a “person aggrieved” in order to suppress evidence in a federal court. See, e. g., United States v. Jeffers, 342 U. S. 48; Jones v. United States, 362 U. S. 257. Argument is at least warranted on this point.

For the reasons stated I would grant certiorari in this case.


text:
    No. 682.
    No. 701.
    No. 975,
    No. 749,
    Mise.
    Mise.
    Passini v. United States, Cole et al. v. United States, DeMaro v. United States, Williams v. United States,
   385 U. S. 1024;

385 U. S. 1027;

385 U. S. 1032; and

385 U. S. 1042. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 32.
    No. 33.
    No. 34.
    No. 35.
    Hoffa v. United States; Parks v. United States; Campbell v. United States; and King v. United States,
   385 U. S. 293; ante, p. 940. Motion of Criminal Courts Bar Association of Los Angeles County for leave to file a brief in No. 32, as amicus curiae, in support of petition for rehearing granted. Petition for rehearing in all four cases denied.

Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion or this petition.


text:
    March 10, 1967.
    No. -.
    Kitzer et al. v. Devitt, U. S. District Judge.

      Myer H. Gladstone for applicants. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Sidney M. Glazer for the United States in opposition.
   D. C. Minn. Application for a stay of the trial of United States v. Kitzer in the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota, presented to Mr. Justice White, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    March 13, 1967.
    ' No. —.
    Lee, Corrections Commissioner, et al. v. Washington et al.

      MacDonald Gallion, Attorney General of Alabama, Gordon Madison, Assistant Attorney General, and Nicholas S. Haré, Special Assistant Attorney . General, for applicants. Charles Morgan and Orzell Bill-ingsley, Jr., in opposition.
   D. C. M. D. Ala.. Application for . a stay presented to Mr. Justice Black, and by him referred to the Court, granted pending final disposition of , the . appeal • by this Court, provided the jurisdictional statement is 'filed and case docketed in this Court within 20 days from this date.


text:
    No. 343.
    Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.

      Whitney North Seymour, Sol N. Corbin, Osmond K. Fraehkel, William J. Isaacson and H. H. Nordlinger on the motion.
   C. A. 2d Cir. (Certiorari granted, 385 U. S. 897.) Motion of American Arbitration Association for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, granted.


text:
    No. 391.
    State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. et al. v. Tashire et al.

      John Gordon Gearin and J. D. Burdick on the motion.
   C. A. 9th Cir. (Ante, p. 903.) Motion of petitioner Greyhound Lines, Inc., for leave to file a response to the amici curiae brief, after argument, granted.


text:
    No. 395.
    Loving et ux. v. Virginia.

      William M. Marutani on the motion. '
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. App. Va. (Probable jurisdietioh noted, 385 U. S. 986.) Motioirof Japanese American Citizens League, for leave to participate in oral argument, as amicus curiae, granted arid fifteen minutes are allotted for that purpose. Appellee is allotted an additional fifteen minutes-for oral argument.


text:
    No. 424.
    No. 734.
    Mempa v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent; and Walkling v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. (Certiorari granted, ante, p. 907.) Motions of petitioners for leave, to proceed further herein in forma- pauperis granted. Motions of petitioners for appointment of counsel are also granted. It is ordered that Evan L. Schwab, Esquire, of Seattle, Washington, be, and he is hereby, appointed to serve as counsel for petitioners in these cases.


text:
    No. 1080.
    Burgett v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. (Certiorari granted, ante, p. 931.) Motion of petitioner for appointment of counsel granted. It is ordered that Gordon Gooch, Esquire, of Houston, Texas, a member of the Bar of this Court, be, and he is hereby, appointed to' serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.


text:
    No. 1262,
    No. 1276,
    No. 1283,
    'Mise.
    Mise.
    Mise.
    Smith v. Illinois; Ross v. Wainwright, Corrections Director; and Parker v. Turner, Warden.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 1021,
    Mise.
    Jones v. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
    PetM tioner pro se. Earl Fair cloth, Attorney General of ■Florida, and David U. Tumin, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas.corpus denied. Treating the papers submitted as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 1296,
    Mise.
    Myles v. Preston, Jail Superintendent.
   Motion for .leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus and other relief denied.


text:
    No. 1224,
    Mise.
    Wilson v. Supreme Court of Washington et al.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus denied.

Probable Jurisdiction Noted.


text:
    No. 821,
    Mise.
    Sibron v. New York.

      Gretchen White Ober-man and Leon B. Polsky for appellant. Aaron E. Koota for appellee.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Probable jurisdiction noted and case transferred to appellate docket.

18 N. Y. 2d 603, 219 N. E. 2d 196.


text:
    No. 895.
    Katz v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to Questions 1 and 2 presented by the petition which read as follows:

“1.- Whether evidence obtained by attaching an electronic listening and recording device to the top of a public telephone booth used and occupied by the Petitioner is obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the - United States Constitution.

Burton Marks for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.

“A. Whether a public telephone booth is a constitutionally protected area so that evidence obtained by attaching an electronic listening recording device to the top of such a booth is obtained in violation of the right to privacy of the user of the booth.

“B. Whether physical penetration of a constitutionally protected area is necessary before a search and seizure can be said to be violative of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

“2. Whether the search warrant used by the Federal officers in the instant case violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution in that said warrant was (a) not founded on probable cause; (b) an evidentiary. search warrant and (c) a general search warrant.”

The Court also wishes counsel to brief and present oral argument on the holding in Frank v. United States, 347 F. 2d 486, as it may affect this case.


text:
    No. 918.
    Will, U. S. District Judge v. United States.

      Harvey M. Silets for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogóvin and Joseph M. Howard for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 867.
    Buck v. City of Oregon.

      Merritt W. Green for petitioner. John J. Burkhart for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio.

Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 839.
    Henry Van Hummell, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      Morrison Shafroth for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Meyer Rothwacks for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 866.
    Dubin v. United States.

      J. Frederic Taylor and James B. Burke- for petitioner. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.