Maryland v. Dyson, 527 U.S. 465, 4 (1999) (per curiam)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4

468

MARYLAND v. DYSON

Breyer, J., dissenting

Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Stevens joins, dissenting.

I agree that the Court's per curiam opinion correctly states the law, but because respondent's counsel is not a member of this Court's bar and did not wish to become one, respondent has not filed a brief in opposition to the petition for certiorari. I believe we should not summarily reverse in a criminal case, irrespective of the merits, where the respondent is represented by a counsel unable to file a response, without first inviting an attorney to file a brief as amicus curiae in response to the petition for certiorari. For this reason, I dissent.

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4

Last modified: October 4, 2007