Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00919/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00919-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IVAN VARGASARELLANO,

Plaintiff,

v.

RENEE M. HESSLING, ESQ.,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-00919-YGR (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

He will be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a separate written Order. Plaintiff alleges 

that Defendant Renee M. Hessling, Esq., the attorney who represented him in his criminal 

proceedings in 2014, did not provide him with effective assistance of counsel. He seeks injunctive 

relief as well as monetary and punitive damages. 

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks 

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims 

that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se

pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th 

Cir. 1988). 

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: 

(1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that 

the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of State law. West v. 

Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). 

III. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief as well as monetary and punitive damages for alleged 

Case 4:16-cv-00919-YGR Document 14 Filed 05/20/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

inadequate representation by Defendant, who was his criminal defense attorney. Plaintiff’s 

allegations do not state a claim upon which relief may be granted because he cannot pursue any 

claim for damages or injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 that, if successful, necessarily 

would call into question the validity of his conviction or confinement. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 

U.S. 477 (1994), holds that in order to state a claim for relief for an allegedly unconstitutional 

conviction or term of imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness 

would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a plaintiff asserting a violation of section 1983 

must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed or declared invalid. Id. at 486-87. If 

success in the section 1983 lawsuit would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of the 

confinement or its duration, the section 1983 lawsuit is barred, irrespective of whether the plaintiff 

seeks monetary damages or equitable relief. Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81 (2005). 

Here, Plaintiff’s complaint seeks injunctive relief and damages from the attorney who 

allegedly failed to provide him with adequate representation in his criminal proceedings. Such 

claims, if successful, necessarily would call into question the validity of Plaintiff’s conviction. 

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487. 

IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend and 

without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 

The Clerk of the Court shall terminate all remaining pending motions as moot, including 

Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (dkt. 5), enter judgment, and close the file.

This Order terminates Docket No. 5.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

United States District Judge

May 20, 2016 

Case 4:16-cv-00919-YGR Document 14 Filed 05/20/16 Page 2 of 2