Tietz v. Marienthal, 385 U.S. 8 (1966). · Go Syfert
Search
Tietz v. Marienthal, 385 U.S. 8 (1966). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Roper v. Beto (txed, 1970-09-30)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Roper v. Beto
E.D. Tex. · 1970 · confidence medium
The two basic issues which the court must decide are succinctly stated in petitioner’s memorandum brief as: 1. whether petitioner’s constitutional rights were violated by the pretrial identification process, thereby . rendering testimony concerning the station house identification constitutionally inadmissable; and 2. assuming that a constitutional error was committed by the introduction of testimony concerning the pre-trial identification, whether such error was harmless under the rule of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 7 05 (1967).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TIETZ
v.
MARIENTHAL
No. 217.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 10, 1966.
385 U.S. 8
J. B. Tietz for appellants., Harold W. Kennedy and Henry F. Walker for appellees.
Published
Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.