Baldauf v. Hyatt

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
JAN 26 2005
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
LEONARD BALDAUF,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. No. 03-1191
(D. Colorado)
JOHN HYATT; ROBERT FAHEY, (D.C. No. 01-RB-1315 (CBS))
Lieutenant, Fremont Corr. Facility;
GARY NEET, Warden; GLORIA
MASTERSON; CHARLES TAPPE,
Hearing Officer; RICHARD
MARTINEZ, Hearing Officer; BETTY
FULTON, Case Manager; DAVID
ROBERTS, Case Manager; PAUL
CARRERAS, Lieutenant; WILLIAM
ZALMAN, Director of Offender
Services; CONNIE DAVIS, Sergeant;
PATRICIA ROMERO, Mental Health
Case Worker; KEN MAESTAS,
Lieutenant; SGT. GARCIA;
LIEUTENANT CARR; DAVID
ARCHULETA, Sergeant; CHAD
NELSON, Officer; UNKNOWN
PROPERTY OFFICER; NARD
CLAAR, Asst. Warden; MAJOR
HARLAN,
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
(continued...)
Before TACHA, Chief Judge, HENRY, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.
As the parties agree, the threshold issue before us is whether the Heck
doctrine, see Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994), bars jurisdiction in this
case. Whether Heck applies depends on whether deprivation of good-time or
earned-time credits necessarily affects the duration of a Colorado prisoner’s
confinement. The record is inadequate to resolve this matter, and both counsel at
oral argument sought remand to the district court for development of the record.
Accordingly, we REMAND to the district court for further proceedings
concerning whether, under the Heck doctrine, the district court has jurisdiction to
hear Mr. Baldauf’s claims. If the court determines that it has jurisdiction, it
should decide the merits, conducting any further proceedings that it deems
necessary.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Harris L Hartz
Circuit Judge
*
(...continued)
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
-2-