Contracts · MBE-tested

DYSON v. MARYLAND

383 U.S. 106·Supreme Court of the United States·1966

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

DYSON v. MARYLAND. No. 455, Mise. Decided February 21, 1966. Petitioner pro se. Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General of Maryland, and John W. Sause, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for respondent. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. Upon consideration of the entire record and the consent of the Attorney General of Maryland, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The motion to remand is also granted, the judgment of the Court of Appeals of Maryland is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further consideration in light of its decisions in Schowgurow v. Maryland, 240 Md. 121, 213 A. 2d 475, and Smith v. Maryland, 240 Md. 464, 214 A. 2d 563. This disposition of the case is without prejudice to any other questions presented by the petition for a writ of certiorari.