Howard Tempy Dearhart, Jr. v. Virginia, 374 U.S. 498 (1963). · Go Syfert
Search
Howard Tempy Dearhart, Jr. v. Virginia, 374 U.S. 498 (1963). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
41 citation events across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Halsey (nysd, 1966-09-02)
Treatment trajectory · 1963 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1963 1994 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Halsey
S.D.N.Y. · 1966 · signal: see · confidence high
See People v. Regalado, 193 Cal.App.2d 437 , 14 Cal. Rptr. 217 (Dist.Ct.App.1961), vacated and remanded, 374 U.S. 497 , 83 S.Ct. 1875 , 10 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1963), rev’d, 224 Cal.App.2d 586 , 36 Cal.Rptr. 795 (1964).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Manuel L. Hernandez v. United States
9th Cir. · 1966 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Regalado v. California, 374 U.S. 497 , 83 S.Ct. 1875 , 10 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1963); McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451, 454 (1948) But even if it were, it occurred here. 'A trespass to a chattel may be committed by intentionally * * * using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession of another.' Restatement 2d, Torts 217 (1964).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Hernandez v. United States
9th Cir. · 1965 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Regalado v. California, 374 U.S. 497 , 83 S.Ct. 1875 , 10 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1963); McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451, 454 (1948) But even if it were, it occurred here.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Howard Tempy Dearhart, Jr.
v.
Virginia
48 M.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 17, 1963.
374 U.S. 498
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published

374 U.S. 498

83 S.Ct. 1876

10 L.Ed.2d 1044

Howard Tempy DEARHART, Jr.
v.
VIRGINIA.

No. 48, Misc.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 1963

Howard Tempy Dearhart, Jr., pro se.

Reno S. Harp III, Asst. Atty. Gen., of Virginia, for respondent.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

PER CURIAM.

1

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811.

2

Mr. Justice CLARK and Mr. Justice HARLAN dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 358, 360, 83 S.Ct. 817, 818.