Wyers v. Bannan

Sixth Circuit

Wyers v. Bannan

249 F.2d 136

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedOctober 24, 1957

DocketNo. 13277

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 249 F.2d 136 (Wyers v. Bannan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wyers v. Bannan, 249 F.2d 136 (6th Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Wyers, an inmate of the State Prison of Southern Michigan, brings this action against William H. Bannan, Warden, and Paul G. Stowers, Mail Superintendent, of the State Prison of Southern Michigan, alleging deprivation of his constitutional rights. On July 31, 1956, appellant attempted to mail a letter to the Clerk of Midland County, Michigan, applying for papers necessary so that appellant, under the statutory provisions for absent voting, might become a registered voter in the County of Midland, Michigan, of which appellant is a resident. Appellees admit that “plaintiff was denied permission to send out such a letter because plaintiff was not qualified to become a registered voter and there was no point in bothering the County Clerk with unnecessary correspondence.” The District Court dismissed the complaint.

The judgment must be affirmed for the reason that under this record appellant has established no deprivation of constitutional rights.

The general right to vote in the states is primarily derived from the states. Blake v. McClung, 172 U.S. 239, 249, 19 S.Ct. 165, 43 L.Ed. 432; Mason v. State of Missouri, 179 U.S. 328, 335, 21 S.Ct. 125, 45 L.Ed. 214; Breedlove v. Suttles, 302 U.S. 277, 283, 58 S.Ct. 205, 82 L.Ed. 252; Pirtle v. Brown, 6 Cir., 118 F.2d 218. Article III, Section 8, of the Constitution of Michigan authorizes the legislature to enact laws to preserve the purity of elections and guard against abuses of the franchise. This authority includes the power to take away the privilege of voting because of violation of the criminal laws of the state. 18 Am.Jur. 230, Elections, Section 80. The Michigan statutes provide (Compiled Laws 1948, Section 168.758, Michigan Statutes Annotated, Section 6.1758) that the term “absent voter” includes any qualified and registered elector unable, on account of physical disability or on account of the tenets of his religion to attend the polls on the day of election or primary election, “except persons confined in a prison [137]*137or jail.” The exception quoted expressly withdraws from inmates of prisons the right of absent voting. Under Michigan law, therefore, appellant is deprived of no constitutional right by the transactions set forth in the complaint.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Wyers, an inmate of the State Prison of Southern Michigan, brings this action against William H. Bannan, Warden, and Paul G. Stowers, Mail Superintendent, of the State Prison of Southern Michigan, alleging deprivation of his constitutional rights. On July 31, 1956, appellant attempted to mail a letter to the Clerk of Midland County, Michigan, applying for papers necessary so that appellant, under the statutory provisions for absent voting, might become a registered voter in the County of Midland, Michigan, of which appellant is a resident. Appellees admit that “plaintiff was denied permission to send out such a letter because plaintiff was not qualified to become a registered voter and there was no point in bothering the County Clerk with unnecessary correspondence.” The District Court dismissed the complaint.

The judgment must be affirmed for the reason that under this record appellant has established no deprivation of constitutional rights.

The general right to vote in the states is primarily derived from the states. Blake v. McClung, 172 U.S. 239, 249, 19 S.Ct. 165, 43 L.Ed. 432; Mason v. State of Missouri, 179 U.S. 328, 335, 21 S.Ct. 125, 45 L.Ed. 214; Breedlove v. Suttles, 302 U.S. 277, 283, 58 S.Ct. 205, 82 L.Ed. 252; Pirtle v. Brown, 6 Cir., 118 F.2d 218. Article III, Section 8, of the Constitution of Michigan authorizes the legislature to enact laws to preserve the purity of elections and guard against abuses of the franchise. This authority includes the power to take away the privilege of voting because of violation of the criminal laws of the state. 18 Am.Jur. 230, Elections, Section 80. The Michigan statutes provide (Compiled Laws 1948, Section 168.758, Michigan Statutes Annotated, Section 6.1758) that the term “absent voter” includes any qualified and registered elector unable, on account of physical disability or on account of the tenets of his religion to attend the polls on the day of election or primary election, “except persons confined in a prison [137]*137or jail.” The exception quoted expressly withdraws from inmates of prisons the right of absent voting. Under Michigan law, therefore, appellant is deprived of no constitutional right by the transactions set forth in the complaint.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 F.2d 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyers-v-bannan-ca6-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack