Defense's Motion for Extension of Time

Public Court Documents
September 25, 1981

Defense's Motion for Extension of Time preview

Cite this item

  • Press Releases, Volume 1. Defense Fund Attorneys Secure Quick Relief for Shuttlesworth, 1964. efb3c1d3-b492-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/99e527d4-9656-42eb-a699-c1a47ecaa711/defense-fund-attorneys-secure-quick-relief-for-shuttlesworth. Accessed August 28, 2025.

    Copied!

    PRESS RELEASE 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
10 COLUMBUS CIRCLE © NEW. YORK, N. Y. 10019 °° JUdson 6-8397 

DR. LAN KNIGHT CHALMERS. - Se ope JACK GREENBERG i < “CONSTANCE BAKER MOTLEY cd 
a Se ~ peooeaeee : , Associate Cour 

aa 3 ey ~ ¥ SS 

e¥ 

ape DEFENSS FUND ATTORNEYS SECURE 
QUICK RELIEF FOR SHUTTLESWORTH 

Supreme Court Acts Within 11 Days 

NGTON,D.C.--The U,S, Supreme Court this week reversed an’. 
onviction against Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth, Birmingham i 
eader, $ 

he high court ruled within 11 days after the oral argu 

sented before it by Jack Greenberg, director-couns-1 of thi NAACP 

‘Defense Fund. gt han 

7 Rev. Shuttlesworth faced 180 days in jail and a $100 fine for 
edly interfering with Birmingham police during the Freedom 
sof May 1961. Fie 

Te
 

4 The Justices delivered their swift ruling in three terse. 

& 
‘This case grew out of an incident in the Greyhound bus sta 

in Birmingham on May 17, 1961 when Rev, Shuttlesworth accompa 
‘group. of freedom riders to the terminal, 

ae a 
pees had tickets to Montgomery and were slated for a 3 o'clh ck 

de, arture. However, they were forced to wait for a later bus b 4 

cause the driver of the 3 pm bus refused to accommodate them, . 

Cd
 

The; Birmingham police then appeared to take the riders into: 5 

tive custody." Rev, Shuttlesworth is reported to have es ped 

wy *) Tedyas to what was taking place, 

i si 
4 ie was advised that such was not his concern, a , 

“However, Rev. Shuttlesworth insisted on accompanying the : 
£ to the local jail and was arrested. He was the only one of theggrap 

* against whom charges were pressed, 5 F 

F ~ Attorney Greenberg argued to the U,S, Supreme Court that: th 

* Alabama courts had denied Rev. Shuttlesworth due process of law On 

*, several grounds, The Supreme Court accepted the argument that the 2 

* Alabama courts improperly affirmed Rev. Shuttlesworth's conv tion 
on appeal on the theory that he assaulted an officer, althoug! he” 

é had not been accused of this in the trial court. ’ z ? 

The Supreme Court rejected the city's argument that Reve . 
& Shuttlesworth's appeal should fail because his lawyers filed a petl- 4» 

tion in the Alabama Supreme Court on the wrong size paper, 

- Rev, Shuttlesworth was represented by attorneys Peter A, Hall, ki 
y and Orzell Billingsley of Birmingham in the state courts. Th . 
Legal Defense Fund lawyers James M, Nabrit, III, Michael Melt@ner a 

and George B. Smith, all of New York, were listed as of course 

the brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, “g 

. be Beh 

M2 zat ae 
; * % ai, ee - 

Pry ow i

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top