Robert Alan Jones v. Henry Wade, Etc., and Frank Dyson, Etc.

Fifth Circuit

Robert Alan Jones v. Henry Wade, Etc., and Frank Dyson, Etc.

436 F.2d 1382

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 12, 1971

Docket30509

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 436 F.2d 1382 (Robert Alan Jones v. Henry Wade, Etc., and Frank Dyson, Etc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robert Alan Jones v. Henry Wade, Etc., and Frank Dyson, Etc., 436 F.2d 1382 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

The civil rights suit underlying this appeal was truncated by dismissal without an evidentiary hearing and without findings of fact. Under notice pleading concepts, the complaint is sufficient to create a conflict between the First Amendment and a Texas statute regulating conduct concerning the flag of the United States. Article 152, Vernon’s Ann. Texas Penal Code. A question is also presented as to plaintiff’s standing to assert the First Amendment question.

We are without a settled record as to the facts relating to plaintiff’s arrest and the state charges which were pending, if any, at the time the federal suit was filed. In sum, we are not able to consider the questions presented in the absence of the basic facts surrounding the claimed events. On remand, the district court is directed to take such action as may be necessary to result in findings of fact having to do with those matters relating to standing, the anti-injunction statute, 28 USCA § 2283, and the constitutional question presented.

Vacated and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The civil rights suit underlying this appeal was truncated by dismissal without an evidentiary hearing and without findings of fact. Under notice pleading concepts, the complaint is sufficient to create a conflict between the First Amendment and a Texas statute regulating conduct concerning the flag of the United States. Article 152, Vernon’s Ann. Texas Penal Code. A question is also presented as to plaintiff’s standing to assert the First Amendment question.

We are without a settled record as to the facts relating to plaintiff’s arrest and the state charges which were pending, if any, at the time the federal suit was filed. In sum, we are not able to consider the questions presented in the absence of the basic facts surrounding the claimed events. On remand, the district court is directed to take such action as may be necessary to result in findings of fact having to do with those matters relating to standing, the anti-injunction statute, 28 USCA § 2283, and the constitutional question presented.

Vacated and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

436 F.2d 1382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-alan-jones-v-henry-wade-etc-and-frank-dyson-etc-ca5-1971.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack