General
Brunson v. North Carolina; King v. North Carolina; Jones v. North Carolina; James et al. v. North Carolina; and Watkins et al. v. North Carolina
333 U.S. 851·Supreme Court of the United States·1948
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
March 15, 1948.
No. 292.
No. 293.
No. 294.
No. 295.
No. 296.
Brunson v. North Carolina; King v. North Carolina; Jones v. North Carolina; James et al. v. North Carolina; and Watkins et al. v. North Carolina.
Argued February 3, 1948.
Decided March 15, 1948.
William Reid Dalton argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief was Nathan Witt.
Ralph Moody, Assistant Attorney General of North Carolina, argued the cause for respondent.
With him on the brief were Harry McMullan, Attorney General, and James E. Tucker, Assistant Attorney General.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
Reversed. Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U. S. 303; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370; Carter v. Texas, 177 U. S. 442; Rogers v. Alabama, 192 U. S. 226; Norris v. Alabama, 294 U. S. 587; Hollins v. Oklahoma, 295 U. S. 394; Hale v. Kentucky, 303 U. S. 613; Pierre v. Louisiana, 306 U. S. 354; Smith v. Texas, 311 U. S. 128; Hill v. Texas, 316 U. S. 400; Patton v. Mississippi, 332 U. S. 463.
Reported below: 227 N. C. 558, 559, 560, 561, 43 S. E. 2d 82, 83.