Stewart v. Dameron, 71-3482.

• Decision Date: 02 June 1972
• Docket Number: No. 71-3482.,71-3482.
• Citation: 460 F.2d 278
• Parties: Frank STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles H. DAMERON, District Attorney ad hoc, East Baton Rouge Parish, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

460 F.2d 278 (1972)

Frank STEWART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles H. DAMERON, District Attorney ad hoc, East Baton Rouge Parish, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 71-3482.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 2, 1972.

Benjamin E. Smith, Smith & Scheuermann, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Carlos G. Spaht, Baton Rouge, La., for John S. Covington.

Emile C. Rolfs, III, Durrett, Hardin, Hunter, Dameron & Fritchie, Baton Rouge, La., for Charles H. Dameron, Dist. Atty. ad hoc, defendant-appellee.

Carlos G. Spaht, Baton Rouge, La., William M. Shaw, Homer, La., Joseph F. Keogh, Ralph L. Roy, Cheney C. Joseph, Jr., Baton Rouge, La., for Sargent Pitcher, Jr., and Leroy Watson, defendants-appellees.

Before WISDOM, GOLDBERG and CLARK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In April of 1970 a grand jury in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, returned an indictment charging the plaintiff, Frank Stewart, with conspiring to murder the mayor of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 and various amendments to the United States Constitution, Frank Stewart instituted the present action in a federal district court, seeking injunctive relief and damages against the various state officials responsible for the plaintiff's prosecution on the charge of conspiracy to commit murder. In his complaint, Stewart alleged that the state prosecution against him was entirely without substance, that the prosecution was being conducted by the various defendants in bad faith, and that the real intent of the state prosecution was to harass the plaintiff. Pursuant to the dictates of Dombrowski v. Pfister, 1965, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 14 L.Ed.2d 22, the district court ordered an evidentiary hearing on the plaintiff's request for an injunction restraining the state prosecution. At that hearing the district court permitted the state defendants to prove the good faith nature of the prosecution against Stewart, but denied the plaintiff an opportunity to introduce any evidence concerning his allegations of bad faith and harassment. The conclusion of the district judge at this first hearing was that the defendants had reasonable cause to believe that Frank Stewart had committed a crime against the State of Louisiana. On appeal from the original hearing, this Court remanded the case for reconsideration in light of Younger v. Harris, 1971, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669, and ordered the district court to conduct another evidentiary hearing for the purpose of allowing the plaintiff to introduce evidence regarding his allegations of bad faith and harrassment. Stewart v. Dameron, 5 Cir. 1971, 448 F.2d 396. Pursuant to the mandate of this Court, another evidentiary hearing was held, and at the conclusion of that proceeding the district court found that the plaintiff failed to show any bad faith prosecution or harassment which would justify enjoining the...