Case ID: f-appx_298/html/0679-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lance Christopher BADGETT; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 07-15559.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 28, 2008 .
    Filed Nov. 5, 2008.
    Lance Christopher Badgett, Vacaville, CA, pro se.
    Before HAWKINS, RAWLINSON and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellants' motion for oral argument is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoners Lance Christopher Badgett, John Badgett, Barry Wiley and Forrest Richardson (“appellants”), appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed appellants’ action challenging the duration of their confinement. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486, 114 S.Ct. 2364 (explaining that a civil tort action is not the appropriate vehicle for challenging the validity of a criminal conviction or sentence).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.