DIDATO
v.
SHAW, DIRECTOR; TATE V. HEINZE, WARDEN; BAKER V. UTECHT, WARDEN; RUTHVEN V. OVERHOLSER, SUPERINTENDENT; GALLAWAY V. MICHIGAN; STOKER V. RAGEN, WARDEN; AND PETRO V. HEINZE, WARDEN
DIDATO
SHAW, DIRECTOR; TATE V. HEINZE, WARDEN; BAKER V. UTECHT, WARDEN; RUTHVEN V. OVERHOLSER, SUPERINTENDENT; GALLAWAY V. MICHIGAN; STOKER V. RAGEN, WARDEN; AND PETRO V. HEINZE, WARDEN
334 U.S. 842
Supreme Court of the United States (1948)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tate v. People of the State of Cal., 187 F.2d 98 (9th Cir. 1951)…l of California, denied without opinion, 3 Crim. 2049; 12-11-47, Petition for Hearing, 3 Crim. 2049, California Supreme Court, denied without opinion; 6-14-48, Petition for writ of certiorari from 3 Crim. 2049, denied without opinion, Tate v. Heinze 334 U.S. 842 68 S.Ct. 1503, 92 L.Ed. 1766; 10-11-48, Petition for Rehearing in United States Supreme Court, denied, 335 U.S. 839, 69 S.Ct. 8, 93 L.Ed. 91; 12-13-48, Petition for writ of habeas corpus, United States District Court, Northern Dist. California, Nort…