Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Jerry Lee Johnson v. Wayne F. McElveen Sheriff, in His Official Capacity

101 F.3d 423

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1996-12-12
Topic
litigation

holding that Heck claims are to be dismissed with prejudice “until the Heck conditions are met” | recognizing that the district court should consider grounds for dismissal other than Heck | recognizing that the district court should consider grounds for dismissal other than Heck | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are ‘dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met’ | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met’ | suggesting that an order dismissing claims due to Heck ahould be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted against under the Heck conditions are met.” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met’ | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | directing that Heck-barred claims should be “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | explaining that claims barred by Heck are “dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met” | finding claims are properly “dismissed with prejudice . . . until the Heck conditions are met” | stating dismissal should be with prejudice until Heck conditions are met | claim dismissed under Heck is properly “dismissed with prejudice . . . until the Heck conditions are met” | Heck dismissal is with prejudice until the conditions are met | describing preferred manner of dismissal for Heck bar

Citator

Cited by
88 opinions
JOHNSON v. McELVEEN,101 F.3d 423(5th Cir. 1996)
JERRY LEE JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. WAYNE F. McELVEEN, SHERIFF, IN
HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.
No. 96-30673.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
December 12, 1996.
Page 424
Jerry lee Johnson, Lake Charles, LA, pro se.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[1] Jerry Lee Johnson, a Louisiana state prisoner, appeals the dismissal1of his42 U.S.C. §(s) 1983complaint in which he seeks injunctive relief and damages. The claims for equitable relief based on contentions of ineffective assistance and state trial court deficiencies must be pursued initially in habeas corpus proceedings.2Claims for money damages based on such allegations implicate the holding of Heck v. Humphrey3and must be viewed thereunder.

[2] We write today primarily to clarify the effect of a dismissal of a civil rights claim under the holding of Heck. When a claim comes within the parameters of the Heck teachings, it is not cognizable under42 U.S.C. §(s) 1983until the plaintiff can show that the conviction "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 writ of habeas corpus."4Because Johnson has not satisfied the Heck requirement, he currently has no cause of action on his damages claims. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal.5Under Heck, Johnson cannot state a claim so long as the validity of his conviction has not been called into question as defined therein, which requires dismissal of claims not meeting its preconditions for suit. The court dismissed Johnson's claims with prejudice. Because these dismissals do not put a defendant to the task of preparing for trial unnecessarily, or inflict other undue prejudice, they do not preclude a later claim meeting the preconditions for suit. A preferred order of dismissal would read: Plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met.

[3] As to Johnson's injunctive claims, their dismissal is modified to be without prejudice. The district court should have abstained from exercising jurisdiction over those claims.6Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.Page 425

[4] AS MODIFIED, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
  1. 28 U.S.C. §(s) 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). ↩
  2. Serio v. Members of La. State Bd. of Pardons,821 F.2d 1112(5th Cir. 1987). ↩
  3. 512 U.S. 477,114 S.Ct. 2364,129 L.Ed.2d 383(1994). ↩
  4. Id. at ___,114 S.Ct. at 2372,129 L.Ed.2d at 394. ↩
  5. Boyd v. Biggers,31 F.3d 279(5th Cir. 1994). ↩
  6. Alexander v. Ieyoub,62 F.3d 709(5th Cir. 1995). ↩