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.
Whiteside v. Arkansas; Vargas Guillen v. California, 2012 — 567 U.S. 950 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Whiteside v. Arkansas; Vargas Guillen v. California
567 U.S. 950·Supreme Court of the United States·2012
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. 11-7979.
No. 11-8655.
Whiteside v. Arkansas. Vargas Guillen v. California.
[MAJORITY]
Sup. Ct. Ark. Reported below: 2011 Ark. 371, 383 S. W. 3d 859; and Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Motions of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted, judgments vacated, and cases remanded for further consideration in light of Miller v. Alabama, ante, p. 460.