General
Benton v. Maryland
393 U.S. 994·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
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. 201.
Benton v. Maryland.
[MAJORITY]
Ct. Sp. App. Md. [Certiorari granted, 392 U. S. 925.] Case restored to the docket for reargument on March 24, 1969, limited to the following question, not specified in the original writ: Does the “concurrent sentence doctrine,” enunciated in Hira-bayashi v. United States, 320 U. S. 81, 105, and subsequent cases, have continuing validity in light of such decisions as Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U. S. 629, 633, n. 2, Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U. S. 54, Carafas v. LaVallee, 391 U. S. 234, 237-238, and Sibron v. New York, 392 U. S. 40, 50-58? The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief expressing the views of the United States and to participate in oral argument.