James Brooks v. IA Attorney General ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 99-4317
    ___________
    James L. Brooks,                         *
    *
    Appellant,                  *
    *
    v.                                * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    Iowa Attorney General; Craig G.          * Northern District of Iowa.
    Ensign, Worth County Magistrate          *
    Judge; Dave Gentz, Sheriff Worth         *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    County; Douglas A. Krull, Worth          *
    County Attorney; Jon Stuart Scoles,      *
    Esquire, 2nd Judicial District Judge,    *
    Worth County; Louis A. Lavarato,         *
    Justice, Supreme Court of Iowa; Dick’s *
    Place Body & Tow; Randy Kunert,          *
    Iowa State Trooper, Northwood, Iowa, *
    *
    Appellees.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: December 15, 2000
    Filed: December 20, 2000
    ___________
    Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    James Brooks appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    action. Brooks filed suit against several Iowa state officials and one private party,
    alleging various violations of his civil rights arising out of a traffic stop. After a careful
    review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude Brooks’s claim that Iowa
    State Trooper Randy Kunert seized and detained him in violation of the Fourth
    Amendment was properly dismissed as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 
    512 U.S. 477
    (1994), because Brooks had no potential cause of action against Kunert until his traffic
    convictions were set aside. See Heck, 
    512 U.S. at 486-87
     (to recover damages for
    allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, plaintiff must prove conviction
    or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged, declared invalid, or called
    into question). Now that the Iowa appellate court has dismissed the traffic charges,
    Brooks may refile his claims against Kunert; we note, however, that the charges were
    not dismissed on the merits, but rather because the appeal had “become stale due to no
    fault of the defendant.”
    We reject the remainder of Brooks’s arguments as meritless, and conclude his
    other claims were properly dismissed. Because we construe the district court decision
    as declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, the
    dismissal of those claims is without prejudice.
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    1
    The HONORABLE MARK W. BENNETT, Chief Judge, United States District
    Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-4317

Filed Date: 12/20/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/13/2015