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.
General
MARKIS v. UNITED STATES
387 U.S. 425·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
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
MARKIS v. UNITED STATES.
No. 43.
Decided May 29, 1967
Alfred Belinkie for petitioner in No. 43. W. Paul Flynn for petitioner in No. 64.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Marshall Tamor Golding for the United States in No. 43. Solicitor General Marshall for the United States in No. 64.
Together with No. 64, Moretti v. United States, also on petition for writ of certiorari to the same court.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted, the judgments vacated and the cases remanded to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut for a new trial, should the Government seek to prosecute petitioners anew. Nardone v. United States, 302 U. S. 379; Nardone v. United States, 308 U. S. 338.