Robinson v. Parsons, 77-1353
Decision Date | 11 October 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 77-1353,Nos. 77-1345,No. 77-1359,77-1353 and 77-1359,77-1353,77-1359,s. 77-1345 |
Citation | 560 F.2d 720 |
Parties | Michael ROBINSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James C. PARSONS, In his capacity as Chief of Police, City of Birmingham, Alabama, Respondent-Appellee.George HARLOW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James C. PARSONS, In his capacity as Chief of Police, City of Birmingham, Alabama, Respondent-Appellee.Thomas D. McGARY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James C. PARSONS, In his capacity as Chief of Police, City of Birmingham, Alabama, Respondent-Appellee. Summary Calendar. * |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Ferris S. Ritchey, Jr., Birmingham, Ala., for petitioner-appellant.
Herbert Jenkins, Jr., Birmingham, Ala., for respondent-appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
Before GOLDBERG, CLARK and FAY, Circuit Judges.
Appellants challenge their state-court convictions of knowingly selling obscene materials in violation of Birmingham City Ordinance 67-2. 1 The district court, on the basis of the state court record, denied habeas relief. We affirm.
Appellants first attack the ordinance. They argue it was unconstitutionally vague, failing to give them fair warning that their activities were illegal. They also advance the separate claim that the ordinance, as construed by the Alabama courts, fails to accord with the requirement of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973), that the proscribed sexual conduct be specifically defined. We reject these claims on the authority of McKinney v. Parsons, 513 F.2d 264 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 960, 96 S.Ct. 276, 46 L.Ed.2d 289 (1975), which dealt with this same ordinance and found these same contentions unavailing. 2
1 That ordinance has apparently been repealed. See McKinney v. Parsons, 513 F.2d 264, 266 n.1 (5th Cir.) (quoting ordinance in full), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 960, 96 S.Ct. 376, 46 L.Ed.2d 289 (1975).
2 The firm rule in this circuit is to adhere to a prior panel's decision absent intervening contrary authority from ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
S & H Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Com'n
...are reversed by the court en banc or by the Supreme Court. U.S. v. Tibbetts, 646 F.2d 193, 195 (5th Cir. 1981); Robinson v. Parsons, 560 F.2d 720, 721 n.2 (5th Cir. 1977). Moreover, even if we were free to depart from the rule of B&B Insulation, we would not do so. Although the rule of that......
- U.S. Pipe and Foundry Co. v. Webb
-
Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Jackson
...Ford v. United States, 618 F.2d 357, 361 (5th Cir.1980); Davis v. Estelle, 529 F.2d 437, 441 (5th Cir.1976) and Robinson v. Parsons, 560 F.2d 720, 721 n. 2 (5th Cir.1977)); Fulford v. Klein, 529 F.2d 377, 379 (5th Cir.1976).4 This refers to the panel (Judges Brown, Reavley and Jones) opinio......
-
Professional Ass'n of College Educators, TSTA/NEA v. El Paso County Community College Dist.
...Mt. Healthy to the panel's attention. Therefore, we regard Mt. Healthy as intervening contrary authority, see Robinson v. Parsons, 560 F.2d 720, 721 n. 2 (5th Cir.1977), notwithstanding its publication before Stapp. Cf. Hernandez v. City of Lafayette, 643 F.2d 1188, 1192-93 & n. 9 (5th Cir.......