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.
Conway v. California Adult Authority et al., 1969 — 394 U.S. 941 · caselaw · US
General
Conway v. California Adult Authority et al.
394 U.S. 941·Supreme Court of the United States·1969
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. 974.
Conway v. California Adult Authority et al.
It is ordered that Charles S. Ralston, Esquire, of San Francisco, California, a member of the Bar of this Court, be, and he is hereby, appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 393 U. S. 1062.] Motion of petitioner for appointment of counsel granted.