Perez Vs. California

Perez vs California

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-26-1969

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/102325

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/102325
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-26-1969
Case Number: 395 U.S. 208
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Perez

Respondent

California

Excerpt

perez v. california - 395 u.s. 208 (1969) u.s. supreme court perez v. california, 395 u.s. 208 (1969) 395 u.s. 208 perez v. california. certiorari to the supreme court of california. no. 39. argued november 14, 1968. decided may 26, 1969. 65 cal. 2d 615, 422 p.2d 597, dismissed. peter g. fetros, by appointment of the court, 393 u.s. 812, argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner. edsel w. haws, deputy attorney general of california, argued the cause for respondent. with him on the brief were thomas c. lynch, attorney general, and doris h. maier, assistant attorney general. per curiam. the writ is dismissed as improvidently granted. mr. justice douglas dissents from the dismissal of the writ. page 395 u.s. 208, 209

Full Judgment

PEREZ v. CALIFORNIA - 395 U.S. 208 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court PEREZ v. CALIFORNIA, 395 U.S. 208 (1969) 395 U.S. 208

PEREZ v. CALIFORNIA.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 39.
Argued November 14, 1968.
Decided May 26, 1969.

65 Cal. 2d 615, 422 P.2d 597, dismissed.

Peter G. Fetros, by appointment of the Court, 393 U.S. 812, argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.

Edsel W. Haws, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, and Doris H. Maier, Assistant Attorney General.

PER CURIAM.

The writ is dismissed as improvidently granted.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS dissents from the dismissal of the writ.

Page 395 U.S. 208, 209