Atchley Vs. California

Atchley vs California

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-01-1961

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100109

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/100109
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-01-1961
Case Number: 366 U.S. 207
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Atchley

Respondent

California

Excerpt

atchley v. california - 366 u.s. 207 (1961) u.s. supreme court atchley v. california, 366 u.s. 207 (1961) 366 u.s. 207 atchley v. california. certiorari to the supreme court of california. no. 95. argued april 25, 1961. decided may 1, 1961. certiorari dismissed as not warranted on record. reported below: 53 cal. 2d 160, 346 p.2d 764. rosalie s. asher argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner. doris h. maier, deputy attorney general of california, argued the cause for respondent. with her on the briefs was stanley mosk, attorney general of california. per curiam. after hearing oral argument and fully examining the record, we conclude that the totality of circumstances as the record makes them manifest did not warrant bringing the case here. accordingly, the writ is dismissed. page 366 u.s. 207, 208

Full Judgment

ATCHLEY v. CALIFORNIA - 366 U.S. 207 (1961)
U.S. Supreme Court ATCHLEY v. CALIFORNIA, 366 U.S. 207 (1961) 366 U.S. 207

ATCHLEY v. CALIFORNIA.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 95.
Argued April 25, 1961.
Decided May 1, 1961.

Certiorari dismissed as not warranted on record.

Reported below: 53 Cal. 2d 160, 346 P.2d 764.

Rosalie S. Asher argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner.

Doris H. Maier, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the briefs was Stanley Mosk, Attorney General of California.

PER CURIAM.

After hearing oral argument and fully examining the record, we conclude that the totality of circumstances as the record makes them manifest did not warrant bringing the case here. Accordingly, the writ is dismissed.

Page 366 U.S. 207, 208

Same Parties Atchley vs California Same Subject Miscellaneous