Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Dutton v. California, 1937 — 302 U.S. 656 · caselaw · US
General
Dutton v. California
302 U.S. 656·Supreme Court of the United States·1937
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
No. 620.
Dutton v. California.
Decided December 13, 1937.
Mr. Charles Dutton, pro se. No appearance for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Appeal from the Supreme Court of California.
Per Curiam:
The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Carlesi v. New York, 233 U. S. 51; Moore v. Missouri, 159 U. S. 673, 678; McDonald v. Massachusetts, 180 U. S. 311, 312, 313; Graham v. West Virginia, 224 U. S. 616, 623. The motion for leave to preceed further in forma pauperis is denied.