Henry Mitchell, Jr. v. Jeffrey Gutstadt ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              JUL 02 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    HENRY M. MITCHELL, Jr.,                           No. 13-57051
    Plaintiff - Appellant,             D.C. No. 2:13-cv-08089-GAF-RZ
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    DR. JEFFREY GUTSTADT, individual
    and official capacities; et al.,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted June 25, 2014**
    Before:        HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    California state prisoner Henry M. Mitchell, Jr., appeals pro se from the
    district court’s judgment dismissing his civil rights action alleging a conspiracy to
    violate his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 
    213 F.3d 443
    , 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
    The district court properly dismissed Mitchell’s action as Heck-barred
    because success on the merits of his claims would necessarily imply the invalidity
    of his conviction or sentence, and Mitchell failed to allege that his conviction has
    been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 
    512 U.S. 477
    , 486-87 (1994) (holding
    that, in order to recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or
    imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would
    render a conviction or sentence invalid, a plaintiff must prove “that the conviction
    or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order,
    declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or
    called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a write of habeas corpus”);
    McQuillion v. Schwarzenegger, 
    369 F.3d 1091
    , 1097 n.4 (9th Cir. 2004) (Heck
    “applies equally” to claims brought under 
    42 U.S.C. § 1985
    ).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     13-57051
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-57051

Judges: Hawkins, Tallman, Nguyen

Filed Date: 7/2/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024