Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00477/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00477-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In Re.

MELVIN LYNN HUFFMAN,

Plaintiff. /

No. C 07-477 SI (pr)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Melvin Lynn Huffman, an inmate at the Salinas Valley State Prison, has filed a pro se

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his complaint, Huffman repeats the allegations

made in a habeas petition filed the same day in Huffman v. Evans, No. C 07-476 SI. He alleges

that he was denied a fair trial because the trial court refused to provide funds for him to hire an

expert witness and alleges that his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing

to obtain certain phone records to show that a witness perjured himself. His complaint is now

before the court for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A. 

A federal court must engage in a preliminary screening of any case in which a prisoner

seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See

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

any claims which 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. See id. at

1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police

Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that

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

violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins,

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

Case 3:07-cv-00477-SI Document 4 Filed 04/10/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

The Heck rule precludes plaintiff from obtaining damages at this time for the alleged

constitutional violations in connection with his criminal trial. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477

(1994), held that a plaintiff cannot bring a civil rights action for damages for a wrongful

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

render a conviction or sentence invalid, unless that conviction or sentence already has been

determined to be wrongful. See id. at 486-87. A conviction or sentence may be determined to

be wrongful by, for example, being reversed on appeal or being set aside when a state or federal

court issues a writ of habeas corpus. See id. The Heck rule also prevents a person from bringing

an action that -- even if it does not directly challenge the conviction or other decision -- would

imply that the conviction or other decision was invalid. The practical importance of this rule is

that a plaintiff cannot attack his conviction in a civil rights action for damages; the decision must

have been successfully attacked before the civil rights action for damages is filed. Heck bars any

claim for damages for the alleged violations of Huffman's right to a fair trial. These causes of

action for damages would not accrue until the conviction is set aside. 

A petition for writ of habeas corpus is the exclusive method by which he may challenge

a state court conviction in this court. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). Huffman

filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on the same day he filed this action. 

Because any action for damages must be dismissed under Heck and any challenge to the

criminal conviction must be by way of a habeas petition, this action will be dismissed. This

dismissal is without prejudice to Huffman filing a civil action for damages concerning his

conviction and trial but not unless and until his conviction has been set aside. The clerk shall

close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 10, 2007 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00477-SI Document 4 Filed 04/10/07 Page 2 of 2