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
In Re Grand Jury Matter (witness Rw)
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit. - 697 F.2d 103
Argued Dec. 16, 1982.Decided Dec. 29, 1982
Anna M. Durbin, Asst. Federal Defender (argued), Defender Ass'n of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
Peter F. Vaira, U.S. Atty., Walter S. Batty, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Chief of Appeals, John J. Rosenberg (argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Before HUNTER and GARTH, Circuit Judges, and STERN, District Judge.*
PER CURIAM:
The issue presented by this appeal is whether, under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1821, a subpoenaed witness is entitled to the $30 per day fee for attendance at court when that witness was serving a criminal sentence.
Appellant (the witness RW) was subpoenaed by a federal grand jury on January 5, 1982, to provide handwriting exemplars. At that time the witness was serving a state sentence in the Schuylkill County Jail. After the witness refused to provide handwriting exemplars, a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Testificandum was issued and he was brought, in the custody of United States Marshals, to the Philadelphia Detention Center. The witness was housed there while government attorneys, and an appointed Public Defender, convinced him to provide the handwriting exemplars. He remained at the Detention Center for another two days while arrangements were made for his return to Schuylkill County Jail.
On January 20, 1982, the witness filed a motion to compel payment of witness fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1821(b). After briefing, Judge James T. Giles of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the witness's motion for the various reasons expressed in his opinion, In re Witness Fees for Prisoner, 533 F.Supp. 401 (E.D.Pa.1982).
For substantially the same grounds expressed in Judge Giles' well-reasoned opinion, we agree that 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1821 does not require the payment of fees for attendance at court to prisoners serving criminal sentences.
The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.