skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 31655 Find in a Library
Title: FEDERAL EQUITABLE RELIEF IN MATTERS COLLATERAL TO STATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
Journal: FORDHAM LAW REVIEW  Volume:44  Issue:3  Dated:(DECEMBER 1975)  Pages:597-616
Author(s): K F KOURY
Corporate Author: Fordham University
United States of America
Date Published: 1975
Page Count: 20
Sponsoring Agency: Fordham University
Bronx, NY 10458
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: IN YOUNGER V. HARRIS (1971), THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT SHOULD NOT ENJOIN A PENDING STATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, DESPITE THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE STATE STATUTE BEING ENFORCED.
Abstract: THIS NOTE ANALYZES THE DIFFERENT CIRCUIT COURT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE APPLICABILITY OF YOUNGER TO THE GRANTING OF RELIEF NOT DIRECTED AT, OR INTENDING TO HALT, THE STATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, AS WELL AS THE CONFLICTING SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. AN EXAMINATION OF THE PRE- 1974 DECISIONS IN THIS AREA, REVEALS THAT THE THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH, AND SEVENTH CIRCUITS FAVORED RESTRICTING YOUNGER TO INJUNCTIONS AIMED AT HALTING STATE PROCEEDINGS, HOLDING YOUNGER INAPPLICABLE TO RELIEF INVOLVING INJURY TO FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. THE SECOND AND NINTH CIRCUITS, HOWEVER, WERE FOUND TO VIEW YOUNGER AS APPLICABLE TO THE WHOLE STATE CRIMINAL PROCESS AND NOT MERELY TO STATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. IN THE 1974 CASE OF O'SHEA V. LITTLETON, THE SUPREME COURT INDICATED THAT IT FAVORED A BROAD APPLICATION OF THE YOUNGER DOCTRINE TO ENCOMPASS COLLATERAL MATTERS. A YEAR LATER IN GERSTEIN V. PUGH, HOWEVER, IN REVIEWING THE VALIDITY OF A FEDERAL INJUNCTION REQUIRING A PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING IN STATE CRIMINAL ACTIONS, THE COURT INDICATED ITS APPROVAL, OF A MORE LIMITED APPLICATION. THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT WITHOUT CLEAR SUPREME COURT DIRECTION IN THIS AREA, THE CIRCUIT COURTS WILL REMAIN DIVIDED ALONG PRE-O'SHEA LINES, ALTHOUGH THE NARROW INTERPRETATION OF YOUNGER WILL BECOME MORE DIFFICULT TO DEFEND. IT IS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE CONTINUED BROAD APPLICATION OF YOUNGER WOULD EFFECTIVELY BAR PLAINTIFFS CHALLENGING ANY ASPECT OF THE STATE'S CRIMINAL SYSTEM (EVEN STATE DEPRIVATION OF FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS) FROM ACCESS TO FEDERAL COURT. THE AUTHOR RECOMMENDS THAT THE SUPREME COURT LIMIT O'SHEA TO VAGUE ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATING STATE CRIMINAL PROCEDURES, AND PROVIDE MINIMAL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF.
Index Term(s): Federal courts; Federal government; Future trends; Judicial decisions; Judicial restraint; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=31655

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.