BALDONADO v. CALIFORNIA

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 185.

Attorney(S)

A. L. Wirin argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioners in all three cases. Burt M. Henson argued the cause and appeared on the brief for petitioner in No. 186. Arthur Warner argued the cause and appeared on the brief for petitioner in No. 187. William E. James, Assistant Attorney General of California, argued the cause for respondent in all three cases. With him on the briefs was Stanley Mosk, Attorney General. Roy A. Gustafson also appeared on the brief for respondent in No. 187. Ben Margolis and Charles B. Stewart, Jr. filed a brief in No. 187 for certain California Chapters of the National Lawyers Guild, as amici curiae, urging reversal.

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 185.

Attorney(S)

A. L. Wirin argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioners in all three cases. Burt M. Henson argued the cause and appeared on the brief for petitioner in No. 186. Arthur Warner argued the cause and appeared on the brief for petitioner in No. 187. William E. James, Assistant Attorney General of California, argued the cause for respondent in all three cases. With him on the briefs was Stanley Mosk, Attorney General. Roy A. Gustafson also appeared on the brief for respondent in No. 187. Ben Margolis and Charles B. Stewart, Jr. filed a brief in No. 187 for certain California Chapters of the National Lawyers Guild, as amici curiae, urging reversal.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

BALDONADO v. CALIFORNIA.

The totality of circumstances disclosed by the records fails to support the substantial due process issues tendered in the petitions for certiorari, and the writs are dismissed.

Reported below: 53 Cal.2d 803, 819, 824, 350 P.2d 103, 112, 115.

PER CURIAM.

After hearing oral argument and on due examination of the records, we conclude that the totality of circumstances disclosed fails to support the substantial due process issues tendered in the petitions for certiorari, and so we dismiss the writs.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

BALDONADO v. CALIFORNIA.

Comments