Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta LaVallee v. Durocher 377 U.S. 998

← Cases

LaVallee v. Durocher

377 U.S. 998 Court SCOTUS Decision date 1964-06-22 Docket No. 1109 English

Decision Majority · Dissent — Harlan J.

Contents
p. 998
No. 1109.
LaVallee, Warden, et al. v. Durocher et al.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Assistant Attorney General, and Ronald J. Offenkrantz and Barry Mahoney, Assistant Attorneys General, for petitioners.
Leon B. Polsky for respondents.

Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

dissenting.

I believe that the issue in this case has an importance which justifies departure from my usual practice of not noting a dissent to a denial of certiorari with which I do not agree. The issue is whether this Court’s holding in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335 , is required to be given retroactive effect. That question-, which is of continuing concern in the administration of criminal justice in a substantial number of States, deserves plenary consideration by this Court, which it has not yet had. See my dissenting opinion in Pickelsimer v. Wainwright, 375 U. S. 2 , 3.

I would grant certiorari and set the case for argument.

Cases cited