General
HENRY v. LOUISIANA
392 U.S. 65520 L. Ed. 2d 1343·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
Mr. Justice Harlan would affirm the judgment of the state court upon the premises stated in his separate opinion in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and in his dissenting opinion in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455.
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
HENRY v. LOUISIANA.
No. 932.
Decided June 17, 1968.
Thomas Barr III for appellant.
Jack P. F. Oremillion, Attorney General of Louisiana, and William P. Schuler, Second Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
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 a writ of certiorari, certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.
Mr. Justice Harlan would affirm the judgment of the state court upon the premises stated in his separate opinion in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and in his dissenting opinion in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455.