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.
Epps v. United States, 1971 — 401 U.S. 1006 · caselaw · US
General
Epps v. United States
401 U.S. 1006·Supreme Court of the United States·1971
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice Marshall, and Mr. Justice Blackmun are of the opinion that motion of counsel for respondent to dismiss petition as moot should be granted. See dissenting opinions in Durham v. United States, supra, p. 483.
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. 56.
Epps v. United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma with directions to dismiss indictment. Durham v. United States, ante, p. 481.
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice Marshall, and Mr. Justice Blackmun are of the opinion that motion of counsel for respondent to dismiss petition as moot should be granted. See dissenting opinions in Durham v. United States, supra, p. 483.