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.

Miller Vs. Virginia

Miller vs Virginia

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-04-1966
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101418

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
383 U.S. 831
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Miller

Respondent

Virginia

Excerpt

miller v. virginia - 383 u.s. 831 (1966) u.s. supreme court miller v. virginia, 383 u.s. 831 (1966) 383 u.s. 831 miller v. virginia. appeal from the supreme court of appeals of virginia. no. 196, misc. decided april 4, 1966. appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. appellant pro se. reno s. harp iii, assistant attorney general of virginia, for appellee. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. mr. justice douglas is of the opinion that in treating the papers as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari should be granted. drum v. seawell, 383 u.s. 831 (1966) 383 u.s. 831 (1966) "> u.s. supreme court drum v. seawell, 383 u.s. 831 (1966) 383 u.s. 831 drum et al. v. seawell, chairman of the north carolina state board of elections, et al. appeal from the united states district court for the middle district of north carolina. no. 1128. decided april 4, 1966. 249 f. supp. 877, affirmed. louis rabil and robinson o. everett for appellants. t. wade bruton, attorney general of north carolina, james f. bullock, assistant attorney general, and thomas l. young for appellees. per curiam. the motion to advance and expedite consideration is granted. the judgment is affirmed. page 383 u.s. 831, 832

Full Judgment

MILLER v. VIRGINIA - 383 U.S. 831 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court MILLER v. VIRGINIA, 383 U.S. 831 (1966) 383 U.S. 831

MILLER v. VIRGINIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 196, Misc.
Decided April 4, 1966.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Appellant pro se.

Reno S. Harp III, Assistant Attorney General of Virginia, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that in treating the papers as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari should be granted.


DRUM v. SEAWELL, <a href="/101418"> 383 U.S. 831 </a> (1966) 383 U.S. 831 (1966) "> U.S. Supreme Court DRUM v. SEAWELL, 383 U.S. 831 (1966) 383 U.S. 831

DRUM ET AL. v. SEAWELL, CHAIRMAN OF THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE
BOARD OF ELECTIONS, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 1128.
Decided April 4, 1966.

249 F. Supp. 877, affirmed.

Louis Rabil and Robinson O. Everett for appellants.

T. Wade Bruton, Attorney General of North Carolina, James F. Bullock, Assistant Attorney General, and Thomas L. Young for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to advance and expedite consideration is granted. The judgment is affirmed.

Page 383 U.S. 831, 832



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial