Arthur L. Hamrick v. Mr. Frank C. Norton, Attorney, Betty J. Just, Clerk, Dist. Courthouse, Saline Cnty., Kansas, 436 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1971). · Go Syfert
Search
Arthur L. Hamrick v. Mr. Frank C. Norton, Attorney, Betty J. Just, Clerk, Dist. Courthouse, Saline Cnty., Kansas, 436 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1971). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 5 distinct courts.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Arthur L. HAMRICK, Appellant,
v.
Mr. Frank C. NORTON, Attorney, Betty J. Just, Clerk, District Courthouse, Saline County, Kansas, Appellees
508-70_1.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Jan 28, 1971.
436 F.2d 940
1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 12162
Arthur L. Hamrick, pro se.
Lewis, Brei-Tenstein, Mewilliams.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Upon docketing in this court, Hamrick was informed that we were going to consider summary affirmance of the judgment of the district court. He has taken the opportunity afforded him to op[*941] pose such disposition in a memorandum addressing the underlying merits.

A thorough examination of the files and records in this cause at this time convinces us that the judgment of the district court was correct in result and should be affirmed. See 322 F.Supp. 424 (D.C.Kan.1970). Additionally, the Civil Rights Act cannot be used by a state prisoner to circumvent the requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2254 that state remedies must be exhausted. Smartt v. Avery, 411 F.2d 408 (6th Cir. 1969). See also Denney v. State of Kansas, 436 F.2d 587 (10th Cir. 1971).

Affirmed.