Raymond Lester King v. Sheriff, Joe Adams, 410 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1969). · Go Syfert
Search
Raymond Lester King v. Sheriff, Joe Adams, 410 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1969). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." HAWKINS v. COMMISSIONER
Tax Ct. · 1987 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Record Wide Distributors, Inc. v. Commissioner, 682 F.2d 204 , 207 (CA8 1982) , affg. a Memorandum Opinion of this Court, 29 Riss v. Commissioner, 478 F.2d 1160 , 1166-1167 (CA8 1973) , affg. on this issue 56 T.C. 388 , 410 , 419 (1971) , Dysard v. Commissioner, 410 F.2d 455 (CA6 1969) , affg. a Memorandum Opinion of this Court, 30 and Zarnow v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 213 , 217 (1967) , in which continued advances to a business were relied on by the Courts of Appeals and this Court in concluding that stock or debt of the business was *129 not worthless.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Raymond Lester KING, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Sheriff, Joe ADAMS, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
26967.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Apr 28, 1969.
410 F.2d 455
Raymond Lester King, pro se., George Anderson, Rome, Ga., for ap-pellees.
Coleman, Per Curiam, Simpson, Wisdom.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to new Rule 18 of the Rules of this court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I.

This appeal is taken from the district court’s denial of a motion for injunctive relief. We affirm.

Appellant, while on probation from a state sentence, was convicted of a federal offense for which he is presently incarcerated in a federal penitentiary. The State of Georgia lodged a detainer against him to take him into custody and hold a hearing to determine whether probation was violated and should be revoked.

Appellant filed his complaint for an injunction in the court below, based upon 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming his state conviction was invalid and, unless the de-tainer is removed, he will suffer damages amounting to $200,000. The district court treated the complaint as a petition for habeas corpus and denied relief for failure to exhaust state remedies.

Federal courts will not interfere with a state’s good-faith and orderly administration of its criminal laws except in those extraordinary circumstances where federally created rights face irreparable injury. Cameron v. Johnson, 1968, 390 U.S. 611, 88 S.Ct. 1335, 20 L.Ed.2d 182; Zwickler v. Koota, 1967, 389 U.S. 241, 88 S.Ct. 391, 19 L.Ed.2d 444; Dombrowski v. Pfister, 1965, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 14 L.Ed.2d 22.

Georgia statutes require a hearing to determine whether probation should be revoked or modified (Ga.Code Ann. § 27-2713). The state also has provisions for post-conviction remedies [Ga.Code § 50-127(1)] of which petitioner has not availed himself. We find no error in the judgment of the district court dismissing the appellant’s complaint.

Affirmed.