Contracts · MBE-tested

BANKS v. WAINWRIGHT, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR

375 U.S. 5111 L. Ed. 2d 108·Supreme Court of the United States·1963

Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Clark dissent for the reason that the judgment rests on an adequate state ground.

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

BANKS v. WAINWRIGHT, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR. No. 76, Misc. Decided October 21, 1963. Petitioner pro se. Richard W. Ervin, Attorney General of Florida, and A. G. Spicola, Jr., 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 Florida for further consideration in light of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335. Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Clark dissent for the reason that the judgment rests on an adequate state ground.