Walter Allen Rothgery v. Gillespie County Texas

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-50267
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
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
August 1, 2008
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 06-50267
2
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 of 2 --