Thompson v. Symington

Ninth Circuit

Thompson v. Symington

73 F.3d 370, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40840, 1995 WL 761918

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 27, 1995

Docket95-16747

StatusPublished

This text of 73 F.3d 370 (Thompson v. Symington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thompson v. Symington, 73 F.3d 370, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40840, 1995 WL 761918 (9th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

73 F.3d 370
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Richard Lee THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Fife SYMINGTON, Governor of Arizona; Grant Woods, Attorney
General, Ann Sterling, Judge; David Markey and
Superior Court, Yavapai County, Division
3, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-16747.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 1995.*
Decided Dec. 27, 1995.

Before: SNEED, TROTT and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Richard Lee Thompson, an Arizona state prisoner awaiting his criminal trial in Yavapai County Superior Court for attempted first degree murder and dangerous assault on a prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). He sought an order from the district court prohibiting the State of Arizona from prosecuting him. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291, and we affirm.

Federal courts will not interfere with pending state criminal proceedings "except under extraordinary circumstances where the danger of irreparable loss is both great and immediate." World Famous Drinking Emporium v. City of Tempe, 820 F.2d 1079, 1082 (9th Cir.1987). We find no extraordinary circumstances here. Accordingly, the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Thompson's action is

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

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