William R. Goslee v. Sergeant Earnest Crawford, City Police Officer, New Castle, Pennsylvania

Third Circuit

William R. Goslee v. Sergeant Earnest Crawford, City Police Officer, New Castle, Pennsylvania

411 F.2d 1200, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12215

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 27, 1969

Docket17584_1

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 411 F.2d 1200 (William R. Goslee v. Sergeant Earnest Crawford, City Police Officer, New Castle, Pennsylvania) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

William R. Goslee v. Sergeant Earnest Crawford, City Police Officer, New Castle, Pennsylvania, 411 F.2d 1200, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12215 (3d Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff is a state prisoner, convicted and sentenced on his plea of guilty. Thereafter, he instituted this civil action against the arresting officer for money damages. Citing section 1983 of title 42, United States Code and section 1343 of title 28 as the jurisdictional bases of the action, he claims that the defendant has violated his civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States. The district court dismissed the complaint as failing to state a cause of action.

The complaint alleges an invasion without warrant of the home of the “supporting witness”, the arrest of the plaintiff when the warrant for his arrest was at the police station rather than in the possession of the arresting officer, and the refusal of the arresting officer to take plaintiff before a magistrate prior to taking him to the police station. We agree with the district court that the complaint does not state a cause of action. Cf. Negrich v. Hohn, 3d Cir. 1967, 379 F.2d 213; United States ex rel. Hoge v. Bolsinger, 3d Cir. 1962, 311 F.2d 215.

The judgment will be affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff is a state prisoner, convicted and sentenced on his plea of guilty. Thereafter, he instituted this civil action against the arresting officer for money damages. Citing section 1983 of title 42, United States Code and section 1343 of title 28 as the jurisdictional bases of the action, he claims that the defendant has violated his civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States. The district court dismissed the complaint as failing to state a cause of action.

The complaint alleges an invasion without warrant of the home of the “supporting witness”, the arrest of the plaintiff when the warrant for his arrest was at the police station rather than in the possession of the arresting officer, and the refusal of the arresting officer to take plaintiff before a magistrate prior to taking him to the police station. We agree with the district court that the complaint does not state a cause of action. Cf. Negrich v. Hohn, 3d Cir. 1967, 379 F.2d 213; United States ex rel. Hoge v. Bolsinger, 3d Cir. 1962, 311 F.2d 215.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

411 F.2d 1200, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-r-goslee-v-sergeant-earnest-crawford-city-police-officer-new-ca3-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack