General
AVANSINO et al. v. NEW YORK
388 U.S. 44618 L. Ed. 2d 1308·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Clark would affirm. Mishkin v. New York, 383 U. S. 602. · Mr. Justice Harlan adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.
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
AVANSINO et al. v. NEW YORK.
No. 72.
Decided June 12, 1967.
Eugene Gressman for petitioners.
Frank S. Hogan for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, First Judicial Department, is reversed. Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.
The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Clark would affirm. Mishkin v. New York, 383 U. S. 602.
Mr. Justice Harlan adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.