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.
RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES, 1968 — 389 U.S. 570 · caselaw · US
General
RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES
389 U.S. 570·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
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
RANDOLPH v. UNITED STATES.
No. 879.
Decided January 15, 1968.
Clyde C. Randolph, Jr., pro se, and Jerry Dee Moize for appellant.
Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Weisl, Morton Hollander and Jack H. Weiner for the United States.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.