Criminal Law · MBE-tested
Best v. California; Hamilton v. Texas
314 U.S. 609·Supreme Court of the United States·1941
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. 344.
No. 586.
Best v. California. Hamilton v. Texas.
James Best, pro se. Mr. Charles Mooney for petitioner in No. 586.
October 13, 1941.
[MAJORITY]
On petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal, 2d Appellate District, of California; and
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
The motions for leave to proceed further in forma pauperis are denied for the reason that the Court, upon examination of the papers herein submitted, finds that the applications for writs of certiorari were not filed within the time provided by law. § 8 (a), Act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 940); Finn v. Railroad Commission, 286 U. S. 559. The petitions for writs of certiorari are therefore also denied.
Reported below: No. 344, 43 Cal. App. 2d 100,110 P. 2d 504; No. 586, 138 Tex. Cr. R. 205,135 S. W. 2d 476; 150 S. W. 2d 395.