Mcgill Vs. Ryals

Mcgill vs Ryals

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Oct-17-1966

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101313

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/101313
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Oct-17-1966
Case Number: 385 U.S. 19
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mcgill

Respondent

Ryals

Excerpt

mc gill v. ryals - 385 u.s. 19 (1966) u.s. supreme court mc gill v. ryals, 385 u.s. 19 (1966) 385 u.s. 19 mc gill et al. v. ryals, sheriff, et al. appeal from the united states district court for the middle district of alabama. no. 381, misc. decided october 17, 1966. 253 f. supp. 374, appeal dismissed. vernon z. crawford, morton stavis, william m. kunstler, arthur kinoy and benjamin e. smith for appellants. truman hobbs for appellees. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the case was not appropriate for a three-judge court. mr. justice douglas is of the opinion that a three-judge court was properly convened and would affirm the judgment of the lower court. page 385 u.s. 19, 20

Full Judgment

Mc GILL v. RYALS - 385 U.S. 19 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court Mc GILL v. RYALS, 385 U.S. 19 (1966) 385 U.S. 19

Mc GILL ET AL. v. RYALS, SHERIFF, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
OF ALABAMA. No. 381, Misc.
Decided October 17, 1966.

253 F. Supp. 374, appeal dismissed.

Vernon Z. Crawford, Morton Stavis, William M. Kunstler, Arthur Kinoy and Benjamin E. Smith for appellants.

Truman Hobbs for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the case was not appropriate for a three-judge court.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that a three-judge court was properly convened and would affirm the judgment of the lower court.

Page 385 U.S. 19, 20

Same Parties Mcgill vs Ryals Same Subject Criminal