McGann v. Eaton , 197 F. App'x 5 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
    Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    No. 05-2864
    MICHAEL B. MCGANN,
    Plaintiff, Appellant,
    v.
    THOMAS R. EATON, SENATE PRESIDENT,
    NEW HAMPSHIRE SENATE, ET AL.,
    Defendants, Appellees.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
    [Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro,          U.S. District Judge]
    Before
    Torruella, Selya and Lynch,
    Circuit Judges.
    Michael B. McGann on brief pro se.
    Daniel J. Mullen, Associate Attorney General, and Kelly A.
    Ayotte, Attorney General, on brief for appellees.
    August 21, 2006
    Per Curiam.       Pro se appellant Michael B. McGann appeals
    from the district court's order dismissing his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    complaint for failure to meet the jurisdictional requirements of
    Heck v. Humphrey, 
    512 U.S. 477
     (1994).      We must affirm if, viewing
    all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true and drawing all
    reasonable inferences in appellant's favor, "it is transparently
    clear that the complaint, in light of the facts alleged, engenders
    no viable theory of liability."       Centro Medico del Turabo, Inc. v.
    Feliciano de Melecio, 
    406 F.3d 1
    , 5-6 (1st Cir. 2005) (citing
    Educadores Puertorriquenos en Accion v. Hernandez, 
    367 F.3d 61
    , 66
    (1st Cir. 2004), and Blackstone Realty LLC v. F.D.I.C., 
    244 F.3d 193
    , 197 (1st Cir. 2001)).
    Appellant alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy, involving
    named appellees and others, to cover up decades of allegedly
    illegal lawmaking in the State of New Hampshire, which rendered
    appellant's   indictment,    trial,    sentencing,   and   incarceration
    unconstitutional and entitles him to damages under 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    .   In Heck v. Humphrey, the United States Supreme Court held
    that "in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional
    conviction or imprisonment, or for other harms caused by actions
    whose lawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid,"
    the plaintiff must first prove that his conviction or sentence has
    been "reversed, expunged, invalidated, or impugned by grant of a
    writ of habeas corpus."     
    512 U.S. at 486-87, 489
    ; see also Figueroa
    -2-
    v. Rivera, 
    147 F.3d 77
    , 80-81 (1st Cir. 1998) ("the impugning of an
    allegedly unconstitutional conviction in a separate, antecedent
    proceeding is a prerequisite to a resultant section 1983 action for
    damages") (emphasis removed).
    The record shows that appellant's direct appeal failed,
    State of New Hampshire v. McGann, 
    514 A.2d 1247
     (N.H. 1986), as did
    his habeas petition, McGann v. Cunningham, No. 97-E-295 (Merrimack,
    N.H. Superior Ct., Feb. 2, 1998), aff'd, Petition of Michael B.
    McGann, No. 98-332 (N.H. Supreme Ct., Feb. 23, 1999).                 Having
    failed to show that his conviction or sentence was set aside in a
    separate,    antecedent     proceeding,   appellant's       current   action
    "necessarily    impl[ies]    the   invalidity   of    his    conviction   or
    sentence."     Heck, 
    512 U.S. at 487
    .     The Heck decision therefore
    required that the district court "deny the existence of [this]
    cause of action" and dismiss the complaint.          
    Id. at 489
    .
    The district court's order is affirmed.
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-2864

Citation Numbers: 197 F. App'x 5

Judges: Torruella, Selya, Lynch

Filed Date: 8/21/2006

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024