text:
    No. 77-868. No. 77-869.
    REA Express, Inc. v. United States et al.; and Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employees v. United States et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 77-886.
    Martorella et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-889.
    Smith v. Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-894.
    Pierce v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-928.
    United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC, et al. v. National Rejectors Industries.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-938.
    Angelini et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-944.
    Frey v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-953.
    Buffalo River Conservation & Recreation Council et al. v. National Park Service et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-990.
    DiCarlo et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-994.
    Morgan v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-995.
    Gordon et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1017. No. 77-1018. No. 77-1022.
    Rhodes, Governor of Ohio v. Krause et al.; Del Corso, Adjutant General of Ohio, et al. v. Krause et al.; and Krause et al. v. Rhodes, Governor of Ohio, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1024.
    Furness Withy & Co., Ltd., et al. v. Bunge Corp.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1025.
    Hess v. Upper Mississippi Towing Corp. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1030.
    Olinkraft, Inc. v. Louisiana, through the Department of Highways of Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1031.
    Boudreaux v. Mississippi.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1040.
    Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1044.
    Caravel Office Building Co. et al. v. Bogley Harting Mahoney & Leibling, Inc.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1045.
    Bergen County Associates et al. v. Borough of East Rutherford et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1047.
    Sherard v. Ginsberg et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1049.
    St. Louis Union Trust Co. et al. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1052.
    Butker v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1053.
    Nutter v. Torrez, dba Perfecto Plumbing Sewer Service, Inc., et al.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1054.
    Trachtman v. Anker, Chancellor, New York City Public Schools, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1055.
    Lunsford v. Investors Diversified Services, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1090.
    Founding Church of Scientology v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1142.
    Robles v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1151.
    Jackson et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1158.
    Allen v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1159.
    Hall v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1167.
    Mageean v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1168.
    Constantine v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5511.
    Jones v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5556.
    Baker v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5733.
    Morgan v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5777.
    Neyra v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5780.
    West v. Brown, Secretary of Defense, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5785.
    Oakes v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5786.
    Bobisink v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5814.
    Fisher v. United States.
   C. A. ,6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5817.
    Harrington v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5820.
    Benel v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5839.
    Longoria v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5845.
    Zuber v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5848.
    Dixon v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5854.
    Speir et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5889.
    Livingston et al. v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5892.
    Shannon v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5936.
    Palanacki v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5940.
    Smolsky v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5949.
    Jardan v. Hunter, U. S. District Judge.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5955.
    McDonnell v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5965.
    Cox v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5975.
    Horng v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5976.
    Emler v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5994.
    Masel v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6002.
    Skidmore v. National Railroad Adjustment Board, Third Division.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6003.
    Tyler v. Missouri.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6009.
    Coone et ux. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6020.
    Ellis v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6022.
    Harrison v. Morris, Chief Judge, U. S. District Court.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6033.
    Caldwell v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6049.
    Doran v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6063.
    Olden v. Community Release Board.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6065.
    Ricks v. Maryland.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6069.
    Ladd v. Alaska.
   Sup. Ct. Alaska. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6072.
    Myers v. Arizona.
   Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6074.
    Trantino v. Hatrak, Prison Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6077.
    Clark v. Malley, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6080.
    Billingsley et al. v. Seibels, Mayor of Birmingham, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6081.
    Williams v. Leeke, Corrections Director, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6082.
    Turner v. Texas.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6085.
    Moore et al. v. Cowan, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6089.
    Tyler v. Goins, Sheriff.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6091.
    Stevenson v. Young, Acting Penitentiary Superintendent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6093.
    Raitport v. General Electric Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6096.
    Walloe v. Cuyler, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6099.
    Conover v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6102.
    Rocca v. Groomes, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6108.
    Sayles v. Haywood, Judge, et al.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6112.
    Anderson et ux. v. Watertown Savings Bank et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6113.
    Heflin v. Oregon.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6114.
    Reed v. Owen et al.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No- 77-6115.
    Lawary v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6118.
    Smyzer v. Dotson, Superintendent, Career Development Center of Kentucky.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6121.
    O’Neill v. California.
   App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., County of Alameda. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No- 77-6122.
    Marsh v. Cupp, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6123.
    Lowe v. Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6124.
    Lawrence et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6127.
    Noone v. Szoradi et al.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6128.
    Richardson v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6129.
    Riley v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6133.
    Carr v. Dick et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6136.
    Christian v. Perini, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6139.
    Crawford v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6143.
    Jenkins v. Washington Post Co. et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6146.
    Raupp v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6151.
    Campbell v. Indiana.
   Ct. App. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6164.
    Miller v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6172.
    Lieberman v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6174.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6175.
    Marshall v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6176.
    Adams v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6181.
    Lipscomb v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6186.
    McElroy v. Wilson et al.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6187.
    Bass, aka Johnson v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6188.
    Berkley v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6196.
    Scruggs v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6200.
    Van Buren v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6205.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6206.
    Lowe v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6246.
    Sumian v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 76-6204.
    Bonner v. Coughlin et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 77-1020.
    Winokur et al. v. Bell Federal Savings & Loan Assn. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 77-121.
    Walker, Governor of Illinois, et al. v. Little.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-732.
    Michigan v. Hampton.
   Ct. App. Mich. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-743.
    Rowe, Corrections Director, et al. v. Ferris.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-986.
    Black, Reformatory Superintendent v. Niemeyer et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondents for leave to. proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-992.
    Raines, Secretary of Corrections, et al. v. Wright et al.
   Ct. App. Kan. Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-691.
    Supreme Court of Illinois et al. v. Ktsanes.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Blackmun and Mr. Justice Powell would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-714.
    Daley v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-733.
    Michigan v. Allensworth.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari denied, it appearing that the judgment below rests upon adequate state grounds.


text:
    No. 77-770.
    Akin v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Application for bail, presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-785.
    Consumers Union of the United States, Inc. v. Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Powell would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-887.
    Surles v. Wirth.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-1048.
    Canon v. Massachusetts.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Stewart would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-1060.
    Condit et al. v. United Air Lines, Inc.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Stewart would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-1057.
    Yuhas et al. v. Libbey-Owens-Ford Co.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Stewart would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-1059.
    Bossard, Administratrix, et al. v. Exxon Corp.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 77-1083.
    Simpson v. O’Neal.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Marshall would grant certiorari.


author: Mr. Justice White,

text:
    No. 77-5757.
    Jarvis v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White,

with whom Mr. Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

In denying certiorari in this case, the Court allows the Second Circuit’s “but for” corollary to the exclusionary rule to pass unreviewed, at least for the present. As applied in this case, the Second Circuit rule allows into evidence the fruits of an arrest involving serious constitutional questions, because the court below could envision a set of circumstances in' which the arrest might have been carried out constitutionally.

Petitioner was arrested on April 20, 1976, on the authority of a “John Doe” bench warrant. The arresting agents broke down the door of petitioner’s home and arrested him in his bed. The trial court approved the arrest on the basis of extrinsic evidence which supplemented the nameless and descriptionless warrant. However, the Second Circuit found the “John Doe” warrant to be invalid, and went on to consider whether the arrest might otherwise be defended under 18 U. S. C. § 3052, which grants FBI agents authority to make felony arrests based on reasonable suspicion. Observing that United States v. Watson, 423 U. S. 411 (1976), left unresolved the constitutionality of probable-cause arrests pursuant to statutory authority effected in a private home without a warrant, the Second Circuit concluded that the facts of this case raised “serious question whether the forcible entry into Jarvis’ home without a valid warrant and in the absence of exigent circumstances meets the requirement of the statute or fourth amendment standards of reasonableness.” 560 F. 2d 494, 498 (CA2 1977).

Nevertheless, the Second Circuit affirmed the admissibility of photographs, fingerprints, and identifications resulting therefrom, all of which followed petitioner’s arrest. Its reasoning was that the agents could have legally arrested petitioner on probable cause as he emerged from his home, and, had they done so, all the evidence complained of would then have materialized anyway. “The illegal arrest thus was not a 'but for’ cause for the introduction of the evidence appellant seeks to suppress.” Id., at 498-499.

This “but for” test presents a substantial question for the proper enforcement of the exclusionary rule. Its origin is dubious, and its use has not been explicitly sanctioned outside of the Second Circuit. Most importantly, it sanctions a post hoc hypothesizing by a court as to what the conditions for an arrest of a search might have been. If a court is satisfied that the Constitution need not have been violated in the conduct of a particular arrest, then, under this rule, evidence derived from the arrest, which in fact violated the Constitution, may be admitted. In short, the exclusionary rule is suspended when constitutional infringements are gratuitous.

The “but for” rule is not a mere application or extension of our cases sustaining the admissibility of evidence arguably the product of a prior constitutional breach. In Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U. S. 471 (1963), this Court sanctioned the use of evidence possibly stemming from an illegal arrest, where the “connection between the arrest and the [evidence] had 'become so attenuated as to dissipate the taint,’ ” id., at 491, citing Nardone v. United States, 308 U. S. 338, 341 (1939). In Brown v. Illinois, 422 U. S. 590 (1975), we recently reaffirmed that “[i]n order for the causal chain, between the illegal arrest and the statements made subsequent thereto, to be broken, Wong Sun requires . . . that the statement ... be 'sufficiently an act of free will to purge the primary taint.’ ” Id., at 602. In both cases it was recognized that evidence which would not have arisen “but for” an illegal arrest might still be admitted if, under the facts as they actually developed, a break in the chain occurred. But in this case, the Government does not argue that an act of the petitioner’s free will intervened to break the causality between arrest and identification. Rather, this case deals in suppositions of how the illegality of the arrest might have been avoided.

The primary rationale for the exclusionary rule is to deter official misconduct. United States v. Calandra, 414 U. S. 338, 347-348 (1974). Evidence that comes to light after official misconduct but not because of it may be introduced. No deterrent purpose is served by excluding it. The Second Circuit rule poses the problem of evidence which comes to light because of official misconduct, but which might well have arisen anyway. It makes the exclusion decision turn not on what events transpired but on what might have transpired. It makes courts not factfinders but fact predictors. As a deterrent, it removes the exclusion sanction from that police misconduct which is gratuitous and avoidable, precisely the type of behavior most in need of deterrence. I believe this Court should give plenary consideration to the interpretation the Second Circuit has given to the exclusionary rule this Court originally fashioned.

I dissent from the denial of certiorari.

        United States v. Galante, 547 F. 2d 733 (CA2 1976), which the Second Circuit cites as supporting the “but for” test, engaged in speculation in a fashion similar to the court’s action in this case, but it also based the holding of admissibility on the interruption of the chain connecting illegal arrest and seizure of evidence by an independent act of the suspect. Id., at 741. In United States v. Edmons, 432 F. 2d 577 (CA2 1970), also relied on by the Solicitor General in opposing this petition, the Second Circuit excluded the fruits of “flagrantly illegal arrests,” while reserving the question of exclusion after “an arrest made in good faith” but lacking probable cause. Id., at 584.

       The Solicitor General relies on only one Circuit case outside of the Second Circuit, Sutton v. United States, 267 F. 2d 271 (CA4 1959). The defendant there sought to suppress all evidence in order to punish the Government for an unreasonably long prearraignment delay. The absence of any causal link between the right infringement and the evidence sought to be suppressed clearly distinguishes Sutton from the present case and from the discussion of “but for” causation generally.


text:
    No. 77-5891.
    Manion v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-6057. No. 77-6107.
    Bowden v. Georgia; and Mitchell v. Hopper, Warden.
   Sup.. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishmént prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 76-5815.
    Zannis v. United States,
   430 U. S. 934.

Second motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-219. No. 77-801. No. 77-5960.
    Plumlee v. United States, Fowler v. Maryland State Board of Law Examiners, and Roots v. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Offender Rehabilitation of Florida,
   434 U. S. 1040;

434 U. S. 1043;

434 U. S. 1059.

Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 72-1679. No. 76-6983. No. 77-5676.
    Hackett, Director, Department of Employment Security of Rhode Island, et al. v. Grinnell Corp., Keefer v. Pennsylvania, and Beard v. Estelle, Corrections Director,
   414 U. S. 879;

434 U. S. 1009;

434 U. S. 1019.

Motions for leave to file petitions for rehearing denied.


author: The Chief Justice Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice Powell, and Mr. Justice Rehnquist,

text:
    March 24, 1978
    No. A-807.
    Brown et al. v. Thomson, Governor of New Hampshire.
   Application for stay of judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, presented to Mr. Justice Brennan, and by him referred to the Court, granted pending timely filing and disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari in this Court.

Should the petition for a writ of certiorari not be timely filed or denied, this stay is to terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, this stay is to remain in effect pending issuance of the judgment of this Court.

The Chief Justice

dissenting.

I would not disturb the order of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Moreover, the Attorney General of New Hampshire having this day personally represented to the Clerk of this Court that the proclamation of March 21, 1978, has been superseded by a new proclamation dated March 24, 1978, filed today, the application referred to the Court appears to be moot, and I therefore dissent from the action of the Court and would reinstate the order of the Court of Appeals.

Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice Powell, and Mr. Justice Rehnquist,

dissenting.

As we would not disturb the order of the Court of Appeals of the First Circuit, we dissent from the order of this Court.


text:
    March 27, 1978
    No. 77-1100.
    Illinois State Board of Elections v. Sangmeister et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 7th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6162.
    Adams v. Mulder et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 5th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5919.
    Richardson et al., Executors v. Blumenthal, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 2d Cir. dismissed for failure to file notice of appeal within the time provided by 28 U. S. C. § 2101 (a) and this Court's Rule 11.


text:
    No. A-739 (77-6178).
    Garrett v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-754 (77-1293).
    Peterson v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-791.
    Fund of Funds, Ltd., et al. v. Arthur Andersen & Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Application for extension of time to file petition for writ of certiorari, presented to Mr. Justice Brennan, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. 54, Orig.
    United States v. Florida et al.
   Special Master’s Accounting of Expense Funds is accepted. It is ordered that the Special Master be discharged. [For earlier order herein, see e. g., 430 U. S. 140.]


text:
    No. 76-1114. No. 76-1133. No. 76-1587.
    California et al. v. Southland Royalty Co. et al.; El Paso Natural Gas Co. v. Southland Royalty Co. et al.; and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Southland Royalty Co. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted sub nom. Federal Power Comm’n v. Southland Royalty Co., 433 U. S. 907.] These cases restored to calendar for reargument.

Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.


text:
    No. 77-152.
    Beth Israel Hospital v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1033.] Motion of Massachusetts Hospital Workers Union, Local 880, for leave to intervene granted.


text:
    No. 77-369.
    Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 996.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae denied.


text:
    No. 77-510.
    United States v. New Mexico.
   Sup. Ct. N. M. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.] Motion of National Wildlife Federation et al. to file a brief as amici curiae denied.


text:
    No. 77-575. No. 77-836.
    John et al. v. Mississippi; and United States v. John et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction postponed, 434 U. S. 1032.] Joint motion for additional time for oral argument granted and 30 additional minutes allotted for that purpose.


text:
    No. 77-1098.
    Bell, Securities Commissioner of Arkansas v. International Trading, Ltd., et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 77-1289.
    Lutheran Hospital of Milwaukee, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioner to consolidate with No. 77-152, -Beth Israel Hospital v. National Labor Relations Board [certiorari granted, 434U.S. 1033], denied.


text:
    No. 77-6321.
    Payton v. Harris, Warden, et al.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 77-961.
    New York Telephone Co. et al. v. New York State Department of Labor et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 77-968.
    Detroit Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    (See also Nos. 77-1100 and 77-6162, supra.)

    No. 77-674.
    The Tamano et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-686.
    Chiappe v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-736.
    New York Stock Exchange, Inc., et al. v. Heimann, Comptroller of the Currency.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-787.
    Tidwell v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-898.
    Pomponio et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-900.
    Velsicol Chemical Corp. v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-901.
    Frakes v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-903.
    Myers v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-917.
    Whiteside & Co. et al. v. National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-936.
    Coastal States Petrochemical Co. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-946.
    Iannone et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-948.
    Zannino v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-956.
    Parke, Davis & Co. v. Califano, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-974.
    Hall v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-962.
    Hawaiian Telephone Co. et al. v. Hawaii Department of Labor and Industrial Relations et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari before judgment denied.


text:
    No. 77-996.
    Poe v. Stetson, Secretary oe the Air Force, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-997.
    Hawaii v. Consumer Product Safety Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-998.
    Logal v. Cruse et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1029.
    Clay v. Bomar.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1076.
    Massachusetts v. Dustin.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1082.
    Joyner v. Phelps, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1084.
    Barbee v. North Carolina.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1088.
    Chestnutt Corp. v. Galfand et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1103.
    Bryan v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1112.
    Duke v. United States Steel Corp. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1114.
    Ternes v. North Dakota.
   Sup. Ct. N. D. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1139.
    Burnett v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1178.
    Quinn v. Kansas Power & Light Co.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1187.
    Black et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1204. No. 77-1212.
    Rodriguez v. United States; and Rodriguez v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1215.
    Cady v. United States,
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5832.
    Cole v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. 111., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5875.
    Duke v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5884.
    Welch v. Evans et al.
   C. A. ,4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5895.
    Rudolph v. Wisconsin.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5971.
    Myers v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6008.
    Asumansi v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6037.
    Wylie v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6038.
    Lewis v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6051.
    Chalk v. Secretary of Labor et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6056.
    Clark v. Benson, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6061.
    Evans v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6134.
    Peterson v. Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6138.
    Arias v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6142.
    Jenkins v. District of Columbia.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6153.
    Ricks v. Hopper, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6154.
    Broomfield v. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Offender Rehabilitation of Florida.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6163.
    Fahrig et al. v. Berger et al.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Montgomery County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6166.
    Tennart v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6168.
    Cloudy v. Indiana.
   Ct. App. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6169.
    Murray v. Calipano, Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6171.
    Exum v. Perini, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6173.
    Green v. Warden, Maryland State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari before judgment denied.


text:
    No. 77-6179.
    Naylor v. Superior Court of Arizona, County of Maricopa, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6182.
    Tippett v. Missouri.
   Ct. App. Mo., St. Louis Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6183.
    Williams et al. v. Hoyt et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6185.
    Rogers v. Thirty-Seventh Judicial Court et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6207.
    Cardillo v. Bell, Attorney General, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6214.
    Simpson v. Kreiger, Sheriff.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6220.
    Pico-Zazueta v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6243.
    Smith v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6249.
    Howze v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6257.
    Hudson v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6262.
    Bull v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6264.
    Kulas v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6269.
    Montes-Zarate v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6284.
    Ilacqua v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6311.
    Eckert v. Hewitt et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-318.
    Shang, Acting Commissioner, Department of Social Services of New York v. Holley et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of respondents Holley et al. for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-958.
    Pennsylvania v. Jones, aka Friday.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1075.
    American Society of Travel Agents, Inc., et al. v. Blumenthal, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan, Mr. Justice White, and Mr. Justice Powell would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-584. No. 77-5515. No. 77-5804.
    Neustein v. United States, Hampton v. United States, and Simmons et al. v. United States,
   434 U. S. 1062;

434 U. S. 1071;

434 U. S. 1074.

Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-5328.
    Hilliard v. Estelle, Corrections Director,
   434 U. S. 1016.

Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    April 3, 1978
    No. 77-980.
    Lewis v. Cowen et al.
   Affirmed on appeal from D. C. E. D. Pa. Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Powell would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 77-1026.
    Riley, a minor, by Gibbs v. Ohio et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Ohio, Franklin County, dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 77-85.
    Smalling, Superintendent of Unified School District No. 480, Seward County, Kansas, et al. v. Epperson et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Carey v. Piphus, ante, p. 247.


text:
    No. A-636 (77-6111).
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Stevens, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-776.
    Keogh v. Main XX XVI, Inc.
   County Ct. of Law No. 3, Harris County, Tex. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Mar'shall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. D-122.
    In re Disbarment of Stillo.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order, see 434 U. S. 979.]


text:
    No. D-125.
    In re Disbarment of Duden.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order, see 434 U. S. 980.]


text:
    No. D-126.
    In re Disbarment of Spar.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order, see 434 U. S. 980.]


text:
    No. D-127.
    In re Disbarment of Gonzalez.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order, see 434 U. S. 980.]


text:
    No. D-128.
    In re Disbarment of Kellogg.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order see 434 U. S. 980.]


text:
    No. D-132.
    In re Disbarment of Esser.
   It is ordered that Gene Ira Esser of New York, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred froto the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-133.
    In re Disbarment of Chu.
   It is ordered that Gene Loy Chu of New York, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 77-529.
    Wise, Mayor of Dallas, et al. v. Lipscomb et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. {Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae granted and 15 minutes allotted for that purpose, provided that the brief of the United States is filed on or before April 10, 1978. If the brief is timely filed, appellants also allotted an additional 15 minutes for oral argument.


text:
    No. 77-888.
    Vitek, Correctional Director, et al. v. Jones et al.
   D. C. Neb. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 434 U. S. 1060.] Motion of appellee Jones for leave to proceed herein in forma pauperis granted. Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that Thomas A. Wurtz, Esquire, of Lincoln, Neb., be appointed to serve as counsel for appellee Jones in this case.


text:
    No. 77-1207.
    Blum, Acting Commissioner, Department of Social Services of New York, et al. v. Toomey et ux.
   C. A. 2d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 77-6354.
    Northern v. Department of Human Services of Tennessee.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Tenn. Motion to expedite denied.


text:
    No. 77-1037.
    Renwick v. United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit et al.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus and/or other relief denied.


text:
    No. 77-1051.
    Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 77-570.
    Avery v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-805.
    Franklin v. Georgia.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-851.
    Fernandez v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-855. No. 77-1118.
    Warner-Lambert Co. v. Federal Trade Commission; and Federal Trade Commission v. Warner-Lambert Co.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-870.
    Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. City of Palestine, Texas, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-885.
    Commissioner of Education of New Jersey et al. v. Board of Education of the North Hunterdon Regional High School, Township of Franklin, et al.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-939.
    Blizzard v. Mahan, Prison Superintendent, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-959.
    Hulver v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-960.
    Clinton Municipal Separate School District v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-976.
    Davis v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-999. No. 77-5991. No. 77-6052.
    Helfer v. United States; Gentry v. United States; and Hornstein v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1001.
    Markley et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1005.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1034.
    Nogueras et al. v. Puerto Rico International Airlines, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1035.
    Vice v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1043.
    Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., et al. v. Garnatz.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1073.
    Lee Pharmaceuticals v. United States
   District Court for the Central District of California (Den-Mat, Inc., et al., Real Parties in Interest). C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1085.
    American Biltrite, Inc., et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1113.
    Lozada v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1116.
    Toro Co. et al. v. Alsop, U. S. District Judge, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1121.
    State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of California et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1127.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1141.
    Walter E. Heller & Co. v. First Virginia Bankshares.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1183.
    City of Evanston, Illinois v. Andruss et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1206.
    Gambino et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1216.
    Duhon et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1224.
    Foster et ux. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1230.
    Taylor v. United States.
   C. A..7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1233.
    Odneal et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1238.
    Levatino v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5539.
    Walking Crow v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5855.
    Rapp v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5916.
    Manson v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5954.
    Carey v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5987.
    Scott v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6014.
    Albert v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6027.
    Silberberg et al. v. United States
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6046.
    Whitney v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6071.
    Abascal v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6079.
    Smith v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6090.
    Lewis v. Chavez, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6106.
    Tyler v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6135.
    DeShazo v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6144.
    Adcock v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6189.
    Cohen v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct.

N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6190.
    Pevlor v. Kentucky.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6193. No. 77-6195.
    Harris, aka Davis v. United States; and Felder v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6197.
    Ratliff v. Ohio.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6198.
    Lyle v. Wyrick, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6199.
    Thundershield v. Solem, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6203.
    Zink v. Estelle, Corrections Director.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6210.
    Stafford v. Weber et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6213.
    Hernandez et al. v. Colorado.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6223.
    Grismore v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6224.
    Schoultz v. Sheriff, Carson City, Nevada.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6227.
    Punch et al. v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6232.
    Henderson v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6240.
    Barney v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6266.
    Mora v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6270.
    Godin v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6272.
    Daniels v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6275.
    Montoya v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6281.
    Speadling v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6292.
    Gray v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6294.
    Summers v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6295.
    Franklin v. United States.
   C. A. 8th dr. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6298.
    Carbajal v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6302.
    Cerkl v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6306.
    Murphy v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6312.
    Pederson v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6314.
    Enriquez-Palafox v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6316.
    Parker v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6319.
    Mullholan v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6327.
    Moore v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6334.
    Simpkins v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1108.
    Antal v. Boyle et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Powell would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-1111.
    Colorado v. Bramlett.
   Sup. Ct.. Colo. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1132.
    New Mexico ex rel. Environmental Improvement Agency v. Albuquerque Publishing Co.
   Sup. Ct. N. M. Certiorari denied, it appearing that the judgment below rests upon adequate state grounds.


text:
    No. 77-1175.
    Illinois v. Pendleton.
   App. Ct.. Ill., 1st Dist. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied, it appearing that the judgment below rests upon adequate state grounds.


author: Mr. Justice Marshall,

text:
    No. 77-5874.
    Little v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall,

with whom Mr. Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

I would grant certiorari to resolve the question whether, before a juvenile waives her constitutional rights to remain silent and consult with an attorney, she is entitled to competent advice from an adult who does not have significant conflicts of interest.

Petitioner, a girl of “low dull normal” intelligence, has been sentenced to spend the rest of her life in prison for a crime that occurred when she was 13 years old.' Her conviction for the murder of her father was based in large part on incriminating statements that she made on three occasions. The most important of these statements was a lengthy confession given at the county juvenile home on the day of the murder, in the presence of her mother, a probation officer, a prosecuting attorney, and two sheriff’s deputies.

Prior to making this confession, petitioner spent 10-15 minutes alone with her mother, who had earlier been questioned by the police concerning the murder and who believed that she was herself a suspect. 261 Ark. 859, 866-867, 554 S. W. 2d 312, 314-315 (1977). The mother emerged from this meeting, “look[ing] as if she had been crying,” and stated that petitioner wanted to confess. Id., at 867, 554 S. W. 2d at 315. Petitioner then was advised of her rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966). She said that she understood her rights and wished to talk. Her confession was tape-recorded and, along with testimony concerning petitioner’s other self-incriminating statements, was introduced at trial over timely objection. Petitioner’s subsequent conviction was affirmed by the Arkansas Supreme Court.

The issue presented here is an important one. In In re Gault, 387 U. S. 1 (1967), this Court recognized that “special problems may arise with respect to waiver of the [Fifth Amendment] privilege by or on behalf of children” and that “the greatest care must be taken to assure that ... [a child’s confession] was not the product of ignorance of rights or of adolescent fantasy, fright or despair.” Id., at 55. Several years earlier, in Gallegos v. Colorado, 370 U. S. 49 (1962), the Court observed that “a 14-year-old boy, no matter how sophisticated, ... is unable to know how to protect his own interests or how to get the benefits of his constitutional rights.” Id., at 54. In both of these cases, convictions of juveniles were reversed, in part because they had not had an opportunity to consult with a relative or lawyer prior to confessing. See 387 U. S., at 56; 370 U. S., at 54.

Requiring that a child receive adult advice before making a confession ensures that the child is protected from “his own immaturity,” thereby “put[ting] him on a less unequal footing with his interrogators. Ibid. Petitioner here did consult with her mother before she made her statement. The mother, however, was plainly not in a position to provide rational advice with only the child’s interests in mind, especially on the day of the murder. The mother had been through the traumatic experience of having her husband shot while he slept next to her, and then had suffered the additional trauma of believing herself to be a suspect, see supra, at 957. Like her daughter, the mother had been given tranquilizers not long before the confession was made. 261 Ark., at 869-872, 554 S. W. 2d, at 316-318. The mother’s testimony indicates understandable confusion and incomprehension at the time her daughter’s rights were explained to her:

“I didn’t know what to do. I didn’t have nobody there with me, and being under this shock, and then them coming and picking her up, and I was sedated, she was sedated. ... I was trying to make funeral arrangements. ... I didn’t know. I’d never been through a shock like this.” Tr. 172,173,175-176.

Under the circumstances, it is hardly surprising that the mother cried when she was supposed to be giving dispassionate advice, see supra, at 957-958, and then urged her daughter to confess, 261 Ark., at 869, 554 S. W. 2d, at 316.

We recognized in Gault that the “competence of parents” is a relevant factor in determining the validity of a waiver of rights by a child. 387 U. S., at 55. When the parent is emotionally distraught, crying, and under the influence of drugs, not only is her advice likely to be less than “competent,” but the parent’s demeanor may well have an adverse effect on the child’s ability to make a knowing waiver of her own rights. And to uphold a child’s waiver on the ground that she received parental advice is surely questionable when the parent has (wo obvious conflicts of interest, one arising from the possibility that the parent herself is a suspect, and the other from the fact that she is “advising” the person accused of killing her spouse.

The difficulties inherent in a situation like that presented here have been recognized by lower courts and commentators. See, e. g., McBride v. Jacobs, 101 U. S. App. D. C. 189, 190, 247 F. 2d 595, 596 (1957) (parent may waive child’s rights if waiver is “intelligent [and] knowing” and “there is no conflict of interest between them”); Daniels v. State, 226 Ga. 269, 273, 174 S. E. 2d 422, 424 (1970) (mother intoxicated; Gault requires “competent, sober mother”); Ezell v. State, 489 P. 2d 781, 783-784 (Okla. Crim. App. 1971) (confession inadmissible despite presence of mother and legal guardian; no showing that either was “capable of protecting defendant’s constitutional rights”); In re L. B., 33 Colo. App. 1, 4, 513 P. 2d 1069, 1070 (1973) (father, incarcerated on drunkenness and other charges, taken from cell to advise son; parent’s “mere physical presence” is not sufficient); Institute of Judicial Administration & American Bar Assn., Joint Commission on Juvenile Justice Standards, Standards Relating to Police Handling of Juvenile Problems 69-73 (tent. draft 1977); Note, 57 B. U. L. Rev. 778, 783, 787-788 (1977).

Under all of the circumstances, petitioner’s contention that there was no valid waiver of her rights deserves this Court’s plenary consideration. At the time that she made the decision to confess, this girl of “low dull normal” intelligence was not old enough, according to state law, to make decisions for herself on such other matters as marriage, voting, drinking alcoholic beverages, entering into an enforceable contract, initiating a lawsuit, and remaining in school. Her mother was hardly in a position to act on petitioner’s behalf on the day of the confession, as discussed above. In view of our reaffirmation only last Term that courts must “indulge in every reasonable presumption against waiver,” Brewer v. Williams, 430 U. S. 387, 404 (1977), I would grant the petition for certiorari.

       261 Ark. 859, 870, 554 S. W. 2d 312, 317 (1977). The psychiatrist who made this observation had been called by the State at a pretrial hearing on petitioner’s suppression motion. He also stated that petitioner had “basic insecurity and inadequacy” and that she was “fearful of doing the wrong thing.” Ibid.

       The opinion of the Arkansas Supreme Court suggests at one point that petitioner might have been 14 years old, id., at 863, 554 S. W. 2d, at 313, but assumes at another point that petitioner was 13, id., at 876, 554 S. W. 2d, at 320-321. The State here concedes that petitioner was 13. Brief in Opposition 5.

       Petitioner had been given Miranda warnings at least once prior to this time, see n. 4, infra, and her rights had been separately explained to her mother, 261 Ark., at 866-867, 554 S. W. 2d, at 315.

       Petitioner had earlier stated, while being taken to the juvenile home by deputy sheriffs, that she had “ 'done it.’ ” Id., at 866, 554 S. W. 2d, at 315. It is not clear whether this brief statement was made spontaneously or in response to questioning by the sheriffs. Compare ibid., with id., at 872, 554 S. W. 2d, at 318. Miranda warnings had been given before petitioner spoke.
      The final set of statements made by petitioner and used against her were made at a juvenile home where petitioner was held for several months. She developed a close relationship with a “house mother,” who later testified that petitioner had admitted to her that petitioner had committed the crime partly out of fear of her father’s sexual advances. Id., at 872-873, 554 S. W. 2d, at 318. There is no indication that the house mother ever advised petitioner of her rights.

       See also Haley v. Ohio, 332 U. S. 596, 599-600 (1948):
      “[W]hen, as here, a mere child — an easy victim of the law — is before us, special care in scrutinizing the record must be used. Age 15 is a tender and difficult age for a boy of any race. He cannot be judged by the more exacting standards of maturity. That which would leave a man cold and unimpressed can overawe and overwhelm a lad in his early teens. . . . [W] e cannot believe that a lad of tender years is a match for the police in such a contest. He needs counsel and support if he is not to become the victim first of fear, then of panic. He needs someone on whom to lean lest the overpowering presence of the law, as he knows it, crush him.”

       Many state courts have required that a child receive competent parental or other adult advice before waiving constitutional rights. See, e. g., Lewis v. State, 259 Ind. 431, 436-440, 288 N. E. 2d 138, 141-143 (1972); In re K. W. B., 500 S. W. 2d 275, 279-283 (Mo. App. 1973); Commonwealth v. Webster, 466 Pa. 314, 320-328, 353 A. 2d 372, 375-379 (1975). See also Weatherspoon v. State, 328 So. 2d 875, 876 (Fla. App. 1976).

       Ark. Stat. Ann. § 55-102 (Supp. 1977); Ark. Const. Art. 3, § 1, Ark. Stat. Ann. §3-212 (1976) and §§48-902.1 to 48-903.2 (1977); Robertson v. King, 225 Ark. 276, 278-279, 280 S. W. 2d 402, 403-404 (1955); Ark. Stat. Ann. §27-823 (1962) and § 80-1502 (1960). In addition, a child of petitioner’s age in Arkansas may not, inter alia, give blood or obtain a tattoo without parental consent, §§ 82-1606 (Supp. 1977), 41-2468 (1977); play cards in a “saloon,” § 41-2459; “frequent” any “pool-hall,” § 41-2461; or operate a motor vehicle, §§ 75-310, 75-324 (Supp. 1977).


text:
    No. 77-646. No. 77-856. No. 77-883. No. 77-5174.
    Brand v. United States, Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, Executor, et al., Dappolonia v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners of Florida, and Murry v. United States,
   434 U. S. 1063;

434 U. S. 1068;

434 U. S. 1056;

ante, p. 915.

Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-5419. No. 77-5695. No. 77-5721. No. 77-5748. No. 77-5811. No. 77-5870. No. 77-5963. No. 77-6000. No. 77-6006.
    Twyman v. Oklahoma et al., Moore v. Brierton, Warden, Thornton v. Georgia, Smith v. United States, Gilbert v. Yalanzon, Barnett et ux. v. Cisneros et al., Raitport v. Bank & Trust Company of Old York Road et al., Haley v. Florida, and Tyler v. Peach et al.,
   434 U. S. 1071;

434 U. S. 1088 ;

434 U. S. 1073 ;

ante, p. 915;

434 U. S. 1049;

434 U. S. 1075;

434 U. S. 1077;

ante, p. 906;

ante, p. 906.

Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-5048.
    Dudar v. United States,
   434 U. S. 864.

Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    April 17, 1978
    No. 77-971.
    North Carolina ex rel. Morrow et al. v. Califano, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, et al.
   Appeal from D. C. E. D. N. C. Motions of Pacific Legal Foundation and Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc., for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 77-981.
    M. R. T. S., Inc., dba Classic Cat Theater v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control of California et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 77-982.
    Taselli et al. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control of California et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 77-1179.
    Stockler v. Michigan et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Mich, dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Reported below: 75 Mich. App. 640, 255 N. W. 2d

718.


text:
    No. 77-1211.
    Regenold v. Baby Fold, Inc., et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ill. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 77-1188.
    Breza v. City of Trimont.
   Appeal from Sup. .Ct. Minn, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6228.
    Demers v. Rhode Island et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 1st Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6231.
    Muka v. Heppron et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6244.
    Marschall et ux. v. Kristensen et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Wash, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6313.
    Jenkins v. District of Columbia.
   Appeal from Ct. App. D. C. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6149.
    Harper v. Duffey.
   Appeal from D. C. Mass, dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


text:
    No. 77-16.
    United States v. Department of Transportation of Georgia.
   Appeal from D. C. N. D. Ga. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of Massachusetts v. United States, ante, p. 444.


text:
    (See also No. 77-5898, ante, p. 559.)
    No. 76-548.
    Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. et al. v. Natural Resources Depense Council, Inc., et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., ante, p. 519. Mr. Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    No. 76-745.
    Long Island Lighting Co. v. Lloyd Harbor Study Group, Inc.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., ante, p. 519. Mr. Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    No. 77-947.
    Bordenkircher, Penitentiary Superintendent v. Gaston.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U. S. 357 (1978).

Mr. Justice Marshall dissents.


text:
    No. 77-6141.
    Busic v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari dismissed, it appearing that the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has been vacated.


text:
    No. A-798 (77-1360).
    Bracy et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Application for reconsideration of denial of stay, presented to Mr. Justice Rehnquist, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-817.
    Weinstein v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-821 (77-1377).
    Hull v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Renewed application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Brennan, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-863 (77-1471).
    Edwards et al., Members, House of Representatives v. Carter, President of the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Application for injunction, presented to The Chief Justice, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. D-130.
    In re Disbarment of Spurlark.
   It having been reported to the Court that Royal E. Spurlark, Jr., has been reinstated on the roll of attorneys admitted to practice in the State of Illinois, it is ordered that the order of this Court entered January 9, 1978 [434 U. S. 1004], suspending Royal E. Spurlark, Jr., from further practice of law in this Court be vacated and that the rule to show cause issued January 9, 1978, be discharged.


text:
    No. 76-1701.
    Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 954.] Motion of Pacific Legal Foundation for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae denied.


text:
    No. 77-380.
    Andrus, Secretary of the Interior v. Charlestone Stone Products Co., Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 964.] Motion of J. Alan Steele for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 77-510.
    United States v. New Mexico.
   Sup. Ct. N. M. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.] Motion of respondent for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 77-528.
    Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.] Motion of American Broadcasting Co. et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae denied.


text:
    No. 77-529.
    Wise, Mayor of Dallas, et al. v. Lipscomb et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.,] Motion of Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Motion of the Solicitor General to permit Peter Buscemi, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.


text:
    No. 77-539.
    Zenith Radio Corp. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1060.] Motions of Ford Motor Co., Craig Corp. et al., Union des Industries de la Communauté Europeenne, and American Importers Assn., Inc., for leave to file briefs as amici curias granted.


text:
    No. 77-693.
    Will, U. S. District Judge v. Calvert Fire Insurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 1008.] Motion of American Mutual Reinsurance Co. for additional time for oral argument denied without prejudice. Should petitioner cede a total of 10 minutes, divided argument is granted.


text:
    No. 77-1036.
    Larsen, Acting Commissioner of Labor of the Virgin Islands v. Rogers.
   Appeal from C. A. 3d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 77-6394. No. 77-6450.
    LeFebre v. Wisconsin et al.; and Davidson v. United States.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 77-1358. No. 77-6245. No. 77-6279.
    Gaetano et al. v. Oberdorfer, U. S. District Judge; Klein v. Decker, U. S. District Judge; and Tyler v. Grady, Judge.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 77-69.
    Panora, Registrar of Motor Vehicles of Massachusetts v. Montrym.
   Appeal from D. C. Mass. [Restored to calendar, 434 U. S. 1058.] Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 77-1163. No. 77-1164. No. 77-1186.
    Friedman et al. v. Rogers et al.; Rogers et al. v. Friedman et al.; and Texas Optometric Assn., Inc. v. Rogers et al.
   Appeals from D. C. E. D. Tex. Probable jurisdiction noted. Cases consolidated and a total of one and one-half hours allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 77-5992.
    Addington v. Texas.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Tex. Motion of appellant for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Probable jurisdiction noted. Reported below: 557 S. W. 2d 511.


text:
    No. 77-1202.
    Michigan v. Doran.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 77-6248.
    Hunter v. Dean, Sheriff.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    (See also Nos. 77-1188, 77-6228, 77-6231, 77-6244, and 77-6313, supra.)

    No. 77-487.
    Frazier v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-763.
    Brackett v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-925.
    Windham et al. v. American Brands, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-977.
    Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-978.
    Western Chain Co. v. Brownlee et al.
   App. Ct. 111., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-984.
    Mascarenhas v. Meridian Hospital Authority.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-988.
    Richardson et al. v. McFadden et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1010.
    Miami Herald Publishing Co. et al. v. Krentzman, U. S. District Judge.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1013.
    Puglisi et al. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1019.
    Livestock Marketers, Inc., et al. v. United States.
   G. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1027.
    Doe et al. v. McMillan, Chairman, House Committee on the District of Columbia, et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1038.
    Stewart v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1041.
    Ex parte Moody.
   Sup. Ct. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1064.
    McLennan et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1065.
    Lawriw v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1087.
    Ewanco v. Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1093.
    Malizia v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1096.
    Feeney et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1102. No. 77-6130.
    Vaughn v. United States; and Little v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1109.
    Moody v. Alabama ex rel. Payne, Commissioner of Insurance of Alabama, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1135.
    Brown v. Tanenbaum, Judge, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1136.
    O'Haver et ux. v. Black et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1138.
    Patterson v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1140.
    Doyle v. Board of Fire and Police Commissioners of the Village of Schaumburg.
   App. Ct. 111., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1143.
    Jones v. Missouri.
   Ct. App. Mo., Kansas City Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1147.
    Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Taylor, Director, Employment Security Commission of Michigan, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1148.
    Norris v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1149.
    Hoffman et al. v. Public Employees' Retirement Fund.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1152.
    Bee Jay's Truck Stop, Inc. v. Department of Revenue of Illinois.
   App. Ct. 111., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1156.
    Alnoa G. Corp. v. City of Houston, Texas.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1157.
    Topps Chewing Gum, Inc. v. Fleer Corp.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1165.
    Thompson et al. v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Stark County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1166.
    Philadelphia Gas Works v. Gulf Oil Corp. et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1180.
    LaFatch v. MM Corp. et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1192.
    Lyons v. Salve Regina College et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1194.
    Lozano v. Texas Mexican Railway Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1198.
    Namirowski v. Nabisco, Inc.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1199.
    Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. Forrest.
   Ct. App. La., 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1208.
    Estabrook v. Wise et al.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1210.
    Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italians, S. p. A. v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1214.
    Davidson v. Columbia University et al.
   App Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1223
    Super Athletics Corp. et al. v. Universal Athletic Sales Co.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1281.
    Dillon v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1291.
    Trevino v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1292.
    Ivey et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1295.
    Burke v. Narragansett Electric Co.
   Sup. Ct. R. I. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1296.
    United States Navigation, Inc., et al. v. Esposito.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1302.
    Woods v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1334. No. 77-1343.
    Liebert v. United States; and Harkins v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1349.
    Union v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-1350.
    Moreno et ux. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5157.
    Hurst v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5479.
    Lee v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5902.
    Burgess v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5931.
    Duran v. New Mexico.
   Ct. App. N. M. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5956. No. 77-5967. No. 77-5978. No. 77-6103. No. 77-6160.
    Stillman v. United States; Bryant v. United States; Perry v. United States; Campbell v. United States; and Smith v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5958.
    Elliott v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. 111., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5984.
    Johnson v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-5995.
    Reda v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6005.
    Himes v. Hewitt, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6019.
    Hocker v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6023.
    Clark v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6031.
    Davis v. Iowa.
   Sup. Ct. Iowa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6039.
    Carr v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6078.
    Lewis v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6088.
    Robson v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6104.
    Carter v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6111..
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6119.
    Felts v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6125.
    Barkley v. Lumpkin, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6126.
    Crocker v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6,131.
    Muncaster v. Griffin.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6137.
    Gillen v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6140.
    Cooke v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6157.
    Phillips v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6161.
    Mize v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6167.
    Morgan v. United States; and Garrett v. United States.
    No. 77-6178.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6184.
    Wright v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6201.
    Pope v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Cuyahoga County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6209.
    Von der Linden v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6212.
    Hoppe v. Wisconsin.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6229.
    Anderson v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6230.
    Riddell v. Washington.
   Sup.. Ct. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6237.
    Blitz v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6238.
    Sheridan v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. 111., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6239.
    Robinson v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6241.
    Gable v. Massey, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6242.
    Martin v. Wyrick, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6253.
    Harris v. Chase et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6254.
    Marcus v. McGinnis, Corrections Commissioner.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6256.
    Backus v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6258.
    Jackson v. Indiana.
   Sup. Ct. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6260.
    McKinley v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6263.
    Evans v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6271.
    McGowan v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. 111. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6276.
    Phillips v. Olían et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6277.
    Howard v. Wyrick, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6282.
    Coledanchise v. Murdaugh et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6287.
    Bunkis v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6315.
    Ennis v. LeFevre, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6326.
    Ralls v. Manson, Corrections Commissioner.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6328.
    Walker v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6331.
    Pittman v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6335.
    O'Brien v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6342.
    Gunston v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6344.
    Watkins v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6349.
    Kizer v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6367.
    McNair v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6376.
    Bowers v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6414.
    Chavez-Chapula v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6415.
    Boettjer v. United States.
   C. A.. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-6437.
    Green v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-643.
    United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC v. Sadlowski et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White,

with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Rehnquist join,

dissenting.

The Court’s action today lets stand the ruling by a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that attorney’s fees are awardable to intervenors in union election challenges processed under Title IV of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), 73 Stat. 532, 29 U. S. C. § 481 et seq. The issues presented in this case- are of serious importance to the proper enforcement of the LMRDA, and also to the prosecution generally of private claims that benefit a broad class of persons.

The decision below rested on two-necessary foundations: that the scheme of Title IV of the LMRDA did not foreclose the awarding of attorney’s fees to intervenors, and that the “common benefit” exception to the American rule against awarding attorney’s fees could fairly be applied to- a case of intervention under Title IV such as occurred here.

In Trbovich v. Mine Workers, 404 U. S. 528 (1972), this Court held that intervention by an individual union member whose initial complaint commenced the challenge to. the election was not inimical to the LMRDA. Title IV anticipates that objections to the conduct of union elections be initiated by union members filing a complaint with the Secretary of Labor after exhausting union remedies. Thereupon, however, it is the exclusive province of the Secretary to commence a civil action in federal district court. 29 U. S. C. §482 (b). Trbovich held that the union member who initiated the challenge might still intervene in the federal suit, “so long as that intervention is limited to the claims of illegality presented by the Secretary’s complaint.” Trbovich, supra, at 537. This conclusion represented a very careful balance between Title IV’s commitment of enforcement authority to the Secretary’s sole discretion, and a recognition that the union member who originally raised the complaint might wish to see his claims pressed in some manner different from that of the Secretary.

The opinion below threatens to upset that delicate compromise. Intervention by union members in support of the Secretary’s grounds of complaint was upheld in Trbovich only because it would make the union liable “to relatively little additional burden,” and would “not subject the union to burdensome multiple litigation, nor will it compel the union to respond to a new and potentially groundless suit.” Trbovich, supra, at 536. Once attorney’s fees are assessable against a union on behalf of intervenors, however, the union has indeed become liable to an “additional burden” that could be quite costly. And the adjudication of whether an intervenor has contributed significantly to the common benefit of all union members could well involve the “burdensome multiple litigation” that the restrictions on intervention imposed by Trbovich were intended to avoid.

Although not controlling, the Secretary of Labor’s views should also be considered in any matter concerning the proper enforcement of the Act he is to administer. It is significant, therefore, that the Secretary has in this case broken his silence on the attorney’s fees question for the first time. It is the position of the Secretary that the awarding of attorney’s fees to intervenors “significantly impedes the effective enforcement of Title IV.”

The other holding below, that intervention in such a case as this contributes to the "common benefit” of the group to be assessed the attorney’s fees, raises problems of its own. A judge-made exception to the traditional American rule against awarding attorney’s fees, the “common benefit” theory is premised on a court’s equity power to allocate a portion of a fund won for a class of persons through the efforts of a single person to compensate that single person. See Hall v. Cole, 412 U. S. 1, 5 n. 7 (1973). Subsequent elaboration extended the early theory to cases where no single class of persons was suing, Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank, 307 U. S. 161 (1939), and to cases involving a common benefit other than a tangible pool of assets. Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co., 396 U. S. 375 (1970); Hall v. Cole, supra.

The contribution made by an individual union member, however, who intervenes in an action brought by the Secretary of Labor, can only with great difficulty be viewed as the creation of a common benefit. The Secretary has already investigated the case, and is already conducting the suit. And the rationale permitting intervention was not to duplicate the efforts of the Secretary. Intervention was held permissible in Trbovich in order to protect a union member’s interest, or his choice of how to represent that interest, precisely to the extent that the individual’s interest diverged from the Secretary’s. The Secretary is the champion of the “ 'vital public interest in assuring free and democratic union elections that transcends the narrower interest of the complaining union member.’ ” Trbovich, supra, at 539, citing Wirtz v. Glass Bottle Blowers, 389 U. S. 463, 475 (1968). Hence, the rationale that provides for the right to intervene in the first place substantially undercuts the intervenor’s claim to be creating a significant common benefit not already provided by the Secretary.

The Third Circuit panel, in adopting a common-benefit theory, correctly observed that our opinion in Alyeska Pipeline Co. v. Wilderness Society, 421 U. S. 240 (1975), recognized the continuing vitality of that theory. More questionable, however, is whether the court below took proper account of Alyeska’s explanation of the antedating opinions that applied a common-benefit theory:

“In this Court’s common-fund and common-benefit decisions, the classes of beneficiaries were small in number and easily identifiable. The benefits could be traced with some accuracy, and there was reason for confidence that the costs could indeed be shifted with some exactitude to those benefiting.” Id., at 265 n. 39.

The intervenor’s contribution admittedly need not be the provision of a monetary sum. However, the lower court’s reasoning that a new election in a single district benefited the entire membership of the United Steelworkers of America in such an identifiable and proportionate way as to justify burdening the entire membership with the intervenor’s attorney’s fees represents logic squarely at issue with Alyeska!s construction of the common-benefit theory.

Both holdings of the lower court appear to conflict with this Court’s decisions. The awarding of attorney’s fees to intervenors in Title IV proceedings threatens seriously to obstruct the administration of the LMRDA. The common-benefit exception has in this case been stretched beyond the bounds of its creative rationale, both as to whether a benefit has been shown to exist at all, given the Secretary’s dominant enforcement role, and as to whether it is fair to tax the entire union with the costs of providing what benefit there might be. I would grant certiorari to resolve these important issues affecting the administration of the LMRDA and the conduct of all common-benefit litigation.

       Memorandum on Behalf of Secretary of Labor 2. The Secretary believes that the availability of attorney’s fees will encourage excessive intervention since, no matter how great or small the assistance an individual might have provided the Secretary, it is only by intervening that he can hope to receive compensation.


text:
    No. 77-910.
    Government of the Virgin Islands et al. v. Vitco, Inc.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-765. No. 77-772.

      Wadsworth, Administrator, New Hampshire Employers’ Benefit Trust et al. v. Whaland, Commissioner, Department of Insurance of New Hampshire ; and Dawson, Administrator, Northern New England Carpenters Health and Welfare Fund et al. v. Whaland, Commissioner, Department of Insurance of New Hampshire.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 77-949.
    Illinois v. Washington.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pav/peris granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 77-447. No. 77-596. No. 77-777. No. 77-853. No. 77-941. No. 77-967. No. 77-975. No. 77-1072. No. 77-5801. No. 77-5882. No. 77-5908. No. 77-5921. No. 77-5923.
    Ratchford, President, University of Missouri, et al. v. Gay Lib et al., Gulf Oil Corp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission et al., Miller v. Harris, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, et al., Walton et ux. v. Papagianopoulos et al., Ender v. Chrysler Corp. et al., Hutter v. Korzen, Treasurer of Cook County, Summers v. Alabama, Yee v. Yee et al., Frivaldo v. Cleland, Administrator, Vetrans' Affairs, et al., Kaplan v. Whipple et al., Judges, Hampton v. Alaska, Gaddis v. Georgia, and Morris, aka Hundley v. United States,
   434 U. S. 1080;

434 U. S. 1062;

434 U. S. 1065;

434 U. S. 1067;

434 U. S. 1070;

ante, p. 901;

434 U. S. 1070;

ante, p. 911;

434 U. S. 1074;

434 U. S. 1059;

434 U. S. 1056;

434 U. S. 1088;

ante, p. 916.

Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-6013.
    Wyche v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary,
   ante, p. 907.

Petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-908.
    Madry v. Sorel et al.,
   434 U. S. 1086.

Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 77-5877.
    Carroll v. Manson, Corrections Commissioner, et al.,
   434 U. S. 1075.

Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    April 19, 1978
    No. 76-1610.
    Ayala et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 434 U. S. 814.] Writ of certiorari dismissed under this Courtis Rule 60.


text:
    No. 77-1000.
    Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Rediker.
   Ct. App. Kan. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 922.] Writ of certiorari dismissed under this Courtis Rule 60.


text:
    No. 77-1344.
    K. S. B. Technical Sales Corp. et al. v. North Jersey District Water Supply Commission of New Jersey et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. J. dismissed under this Court's Rule 60.