vacated on other grounds, 449 U.S. 809, 101 S.Ct. 56, 66 L.Ed.2d 12 [1980]
How later courts described this case
- vacated on other grounds, 449 U.S. 809, 101 S.Ct. 56, 66 L.Ed.2d 12 [1980]
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DONNELLY, Judge,
dissenting.
The principal opinion treats the Per Curiam in Harris v. Oklahoma, 433 U.S. 682 , 97 S.Ct. 2912 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1054 (1977) as decisive here.
In my view, we are not bound by general declarations of law made by the United States Supreme Court. See State v. Clark, 592 S.W.2d 709 (Mo. banc 1979) (Donnelly, J., dissenting) (1979).
Of course, in a given factual setting, when the United States Supreme Court *809 takes jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties, its adjudication is the law of the case and its judgment is binding on this Court. But this is not the situation here.
I respectfully dissent.