Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02157/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02157-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2157

___________

Bertha Mae McBride, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Rose Higgins, Administrative Review * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Officer, McPherson Unit, ADC, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: March 31, 2004

Filed: May 5, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Bertha Mae McBride brought a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action

against administrative review officer Rose Higgins. McBride alleged that, after she

filed a grievance complaining about continued harassment by two officers, Higgins

issued her a “major disciplinary” for using the grievance process. The disciplinary

resulted in a classification reduction, thirty days in segregation, and the loss of

good-time credit. McBride sought punitive damages and restoration of her good-time

Appellate Case: 03-2157 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2004 Entry ID: 1763910 
1

The Honorable George Howard, Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable John F. Forster, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District

of Arkansas.

-2-

credit and class. Prior to service, the district court1

 dismissed her complaint without

prejudice. McBride appeals.

The district court properly dismissed McBride’s action after concluding that

her claim was foreclosed by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (to recover

damages for unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for harm from actions

whose unlawfulness would render conviction or sentence invalid, § 1983 plaintiff

must prove conviction or sentence has been reversed, expunged, declared invalid, or

called into question), because she challenged discipline that included the loss of

good-time credit, and a judgment in her favor would necessarily imply the invalidity

of her disciplinary conviction. See Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 644-48 (1997)

(extending Heck to prison discipline decisions).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R.

47A(a).

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-2157 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2004 Entry ID: 1763910