Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

436 F.2d 1082

Docket No. 30701 Summary Calendar.*

Kirby v. Sutton

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1971-01-18

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1989

6 federal appellate ·

1 counsel of record

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Wade v. Wilson · Texas v. Payton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1971-01-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Donald L. Kirby, pro se.

Before BELL, AINSWORTH, and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

The complaint underlying this appeal was brought under the civil rights jurisdiction of the court, 42 U.S. C.A. section 1983, 28 U.S.C.A. section 1343, against a state court reporter to obtain a copy of the transcript of the state trial wherein petitioner, a state prisoner, was convicted. It is alleged that the transcript is needed for study so as to enable petitioner to petition for post-conviction relief.

¶2

There was no showing whatever that petitioner had exhausted available post-conviction remedies in the Texas State Courts. The transcript question presented is properly a part of such state post-conviction remedy, being ancillary thereto.

¶3

We treat the petition as a petition for the federal writ of habeas corpus and dismiss for failure to exhaust available state remedies. 28 U.S.C.A. section 2254; Stepp v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1968, 398 F.2d 814; Texas v. Payton, 5 Cir., 1968, 390 F.2d 261. Compare the exhaustion efforts in Wade v. Wilson, 1970, 396 U. S. 282, 90 S.Ct. 501, 24 L.Ed.2d 470.

¶4

The judgment of the district court dismissing the complaint is affirmed.

/436/f2d/1082 · .json · Public domain