Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

543 F.2d 555

Docket No. 76-2813

Carter v. Hardy

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Dec. 6, 1976.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Feb. 7, 1977.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1976-12-06

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1997

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 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 · Rogers v. Slaughter · Carter v. Hardy

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1976-12-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.*

¶2Albert H. Carter, pro se.

¶3Gus Drake, Anthony D. Sheppard, Asst. County Attys., Houston, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

¶4Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and GEW-IN and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

¶6PER CURIAM:

¶7Appellant Carter again sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking expungement of records of his 1963 and 1965 Texas bad-check convictions. See Carter v. Hardy, 526 F.2d 314 (5th Cir. 1976). In the first suit he claimed that the convictions should be held constitutionally invalid because, he alleged, he had been indigent at the time of trial and had been denied counsel. We affirmed dismissal of the complaint on the ground that Carter had not alleged exceptional circumstances sufficient to invoke the court’s “exceedingly narrow scope” of power to order expunction of state conviction records, relying on Rogers v. Slaughter, 469 F.2d 1084 (5th Cir. 1972).

¶8The only difference between the instant case and Carter’s earlier suit is that this one challenges the constitutionality of the statute under which he was convicted, rather than of the procedures at trial. We do not think this difference is material, and therefore affirm the district court’s dismissal. Hill v. Johnson, 539 F.2d 439 (5th Cir. 1976); Carter v. Hardy, supra.

¶9AFFIRMED.

/543/f2d/555 · .json · Public domain