DONALD LEE KIRBY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
BILL S. SUTTON, COURT REPORTER FOR CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1971-01-18
No. 30701
436 F.2d 1082 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1971) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Appellants, a newspaper publisher and a reporter, appeal a civil contempt order issued after the reporter refused to reveal the source for an article concerning an ethics complaint filed against county commissioners.


Holding

The court affirmed the civil contempt order, finding that the state's interest in investigating potential statutory violations outweighed the reporter's First Amendment privilege to protect a confidential source in this context.


Facts & Procedural History

A reporter wrote an article quoting a confidential source about an ethics complaint filed against two county commissioners. The commissioners subseque…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

[*1083] PER CURIAM:

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.

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.

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.

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


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw