Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Billy Vs. Oklahoma

Billy vs Oklahoma

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-24-1965
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101130

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
381 U.S. 354
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Billy

Respondent

Oklahoma

Excerpt

billy v. oklahoma - 381 u.s. 354 (1965) u.s. supreme court billy v. oklahoma, 381 u.s. 354 (1965) 381 u.s. 354 billy v. oklahoma. appeal from the court of criminal appeals of oklahoma. no. 1034. decided may 24, 1965. appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. reported below: 397 p.2d 913. sid white for appellant. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. page 381 u.s. 354, 355 samara v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority, 381 u.s. 354 (1965) 381 u.s. 354 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court samara v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority, 381 u.s. 354 (1965) 381 u.s. 354 samara et al. v. oklahoma capitol improvement authority. appeal from the supreme court of oklahoma. no. 1002. decided may 24, 1965. appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. reported below: 398 p.2d 89. leroy powers and gus rinehart for appellants. charles nesbitt, attorney general of oklahoma, and harvey h. cody and joseph c. muskrat, assistant attorneys general, for appellee. per curiam. the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Full Judgment

BILLY v. OKLAHOMA - 381 U.S. 354 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court BILLY v. OKLAHOMA, 381 U.S. 354 (1965) 381 U.S. 354

BILLY v. OKLAHOMA.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA.
No. 1034.
Decided May 24, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 397 P.2d 913.

Sid White for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 381 U.S. 354, 355


SAMARA v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, <a href="/101130"> 381 U.S. 354 </a> (1965) 381 U.S. 354 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court SAMARA v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, 381 U.S. 354 (1965) 381 U.S. 354

SAMARA ET AL. v. OKLAHOMA CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OKLAHOMA.
No. 1002.
Decided May 24, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 398 P.2d 89.

Leroy Powers and Gus Rinehart for appellants.

Charles Nesbitt, Attorney General of Oklahoma, and Harvey H. Cody and Joseph C. Muskrat, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial