Dixon v. Beto, 72-2732 Summary Calendar.
| Decision Date | 23 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-2732 Summary Calendar.,72-2732 Summary Calendar. |
| Citation | 472 F.2d 598 |
| Parties | Weldon Clark DIXON, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Dr. George J. BETO, Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Crawford Martin, Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for respondent-appellant.
Weldon Clark Dixon, pro se.
Before BELL, DYER and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
This is the second appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas where the district court ordered the state court to hold an evidentiary hearing in a habeas matter involving a state prisoner. In Anderson v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1972, 469 F.2d 1076 dated November 27, 1972, we held that the district court exceeded its authority in so doing. We make the same holding here. Cf. also Clark v. Henderson, 5 Cir., 1972, 465 F.2d 888.
The exhaustion of state remedies doctrine, Ex Parte Royall, 117 U.S. 241, 6 S.Ct. 734, 29 L.Ed. 868 (1886); Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963), is based on principles of comity to afford the state courts the first opportunity to pass on the claims of state prisoners that they were deprived of federal constitutional rights in connection with their restraint. Once state remedies are exhausted, it is the duty of the federal courts to pass on such claims. The federal courts are not empowered to order the state courts to make remedies available nor are they authorized to dictate the type of hearing which is to be conducted by the state courts.
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Bryan v. Estelle
...to order state courts to hold hearings in habeas matters. Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. at 313 n. 9, 83 S.Ct. at 757 n. 9; Dixon v. Beto, 472 F.2d 598 (5th Cir.1973). (i) Fifth Circuit cases Jackson v. Beto, 428 F.2d 1054 (5th Cir.1970), was this Court's first "post-Witherspoon " decision. 23 ......
-
Gibson v. Jackson
...federal courts are not empowered . . . to dictate the type of hearing which is to be conducted by the state courts," Dixon v. Beto, 5 Cir. 1973, 472 F.2d 598, 599, we are authorized, indeed required, to ensure that constitutional rights are honored in state habeas proceedings. See, e. g., H......
-
Grigsby v. Mabry, s. 80-1262
...constitutional claims for a state court hearing and requiring further appellate proceedings in the state court. In Dixon v. Beto, 472 F.2d 598 (5th Cir. 1973), the court The exhaustion of state remedies doctrine, ... is based on principles of comity to afford the state courts the first oppo......
-
Hoskins v. Wainwright
...5 Cir., 1968, 396 F.2d 214; Cline v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1969, 418 F.2d 549; with Anderson v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1972, 469 F. 2d 1076; Dixon v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1973, 472 F.2d 598. He held — and the District Court below adopted his holding — that the state had effectively demonstrated that Hoskins' case ......