Contracts · MBE-tested
BARNES v. NORTH CAROLINA
375 U.S. 2811 L. Ed. 2d 45·Supreme Court of the United States·1963
Mr. Justice Harlan, for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Pickelsimer v. Wainwright, ante, p. 3, would have withheld disposition of this petition for certiorari until the disposition, after argument, of that case.
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
BARNES v. NORTH CAROLINA.
No. 385,
Misc.
Decided October 14, 1963.
Samuel S. Mitchell for petitioner.
Thomas Wade Bruton, Attorney General of North Carolina, and James F. Bullock, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of North Carolina for further consideration in light of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335.
Mr. Justice Harlan, for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Pickelsimer v. Wainwright, ante, p. 3, would have withheld disposition of this petition for certiorari until the disposition, after argument, of that case.