Rothgery v. Gillespie Cty TX

Filing 920080801

Opinion

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 1, 2008 No. 06-50267 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk WALTER ALLEN ROTHGERY Plaintiff - Appellant v. GILLESPIE COUNTY TEXAS Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The Supreme Court vacated this court's judgment in this case and remanded the case to us for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. See Rothgery v. Gillespie County, --- U.S. ----, 128 S. Ct. 2578 (2008), rev'g 491 F.3d 293 (5th Cir. 2007). The Court decided what it termed a "threshold issue" in the case, holding that "a criminal defendant's initial appearance before a judicial officer, where he learns the charge against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the start of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel." Id. at ----, 128 S. Ct. at 2592. The Court did not decide whether Rothgery's Sixth Amendment right had No. 06-50267 been violated or, if so, whether Rothgery suffered cognizable harm. Proceeding from a different and incorrect premise on the threshold issue (as did this court), the district court had granted summary judgment in favor of Gillespie County. Under the circumstances, we think it advisable to vacate the district court's judgment and to remand for further proceedings that, from the beginning, are consistent with the Court's opinion. VACATED and REMANDED. Costs shall be borne by Gillespie County. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?