Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Chessman v. California et al., 1954 — 348 U.S. 864 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Chessman v. California et al.
348 U.S. 864·Supreme Court of the United States·1954
The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 285.
Chessman v. California et al.
Jerome A. Duffy for petitioner.
Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General of California, Clarence A. Linn, Chief Assistant Attorney General, and Arlo E. Smith, Deputy Attorney General, for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Supreme Court of California. Petition for writ of certiorari denied without prejudice to an application for a writ of habeas corpus in an appropriate United States District Court.
The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.