Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google
Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web
Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google News
Archive Search
Yahoo!
News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book
Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Keith Laverne Shank, Appellant, v. Sgt. T. H. Spruill and Detective H. G. Wagner, Appellees
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. - 406 F.2d 756
Jan. 28, 1969
Keith Laverne Shank, pro se.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., for appellees.
Sgt. T. H. Spruill and Detective H. G. Wagner, Employees of DeKalb City Police Dept., pro sese.
Before TUTTLE and GEWIN, Circuit Judges, and PITTMAN, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
The petitioner is seeking injunctive and legal redress against the state of Georgia and two DeKalb County policemen. He claims that they forcefully brought him to Georgia from Florida to stand trial for a Georgia offense. He was convicted of the charge and sent to state prison. He later escaped and while out committed a federal offense. He currently is in a federal penitentiary. Georgia officials have filed detainers.
His current action probably is brought under the Civil Rights Acts, most likely 42 U.S.C.A. 1983. His papers do not make that clear. In any case the claim is barred on two grounds. First, there is no statute of limitations in the Civil Rights Act. Therefore, the limitation provision of the states apply. Here that is the Georgia limitation statute, Section 3-1004, which provides a two year period in cases such as this. Also, even if the claim were timely, it would fail because so long as the Georgia conviction stands the arrest must be viewed as proper. He has yet to try Georgia habeas corpus procedures to challenge the arrest and conviction.
The judgment is affirmed.