From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamrick v. Norton

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jan 28, 1971
436 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1971)

Opinion

No. 508-70.

January 28, 1971.

Arthur L. Hamrick, pro se.

Before LEWIS, Chief Judge, BREITENSTEIN and McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.


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 oppose 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.


Summaries of

Hamrick v. Norton

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Jan 28, 1971
436 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1971)
Case details for

Hamrick v. Norton

Case Details

Full title:Arthur L. HAMRICK, Appellant, v. Mr. Frank C. NORTON, Attorney, Betty J…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Jan 28, 1971

Citations

436 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1971)

Citing Cases

State v. Burnett

. . ." Williams v. Oklahoma City, 395 U.S. 458, 459, 23 L.Ed.2d 440, 89 S.Ct. 1818; accord, Hamrick v.…

State of Louisiana ex Rel. Purkey v. Ciolino

One element of a 1983 claim is that the conduct complained of was engaged in under color of state law.…