IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-30770

Summary Calendar

ZACHARY TERRELL, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

TROY PICHON, Trooper, in his individual capacity; DERRELL WILLIAMS, 

Lieutenant, in his individual capacity; DARRIN NAQUIN, Captain, in his 

individual capacity,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:18-CV-5787

Before CLEMENT, ELROD, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

On June 17, 2017, Officer Troy Pichon saw Zachary Terrell engage in 

what appeared to be a narcotics transaction in the French Quarter. He and 

Officer Jeffrey Roach circled the block in their police car. After they returned 

to where Terrell was standing, Terrell began riding his bicycle away from the 

scene. Pichon told Terrell to stop, but Terrell began pedaling faster. Terrell 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 4, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-30770 Document: 00515332590 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/04/2020
No. 19-30770

2

had only one hand on the bike’s handlebars. His other hand was clutching his 

waistband. 

Pichon deployed his Taser, striking Terrell in the back. Terrell fell off 

the bike and hit the ground. Pichon observed Terrell drop something on the 

street and told Roach to pick it up. Roach did so and found a blister pack of 

Tramadol pills. Pichon placed Terrell under arrest. A search revealed that 

Terrell was carrying seventeen individually wrapped bags of heroin, twentyone Tramadol pills (including the six that he dropped on the street), and $113 

in cash.

During the tasing and subsequent arrest, Terrell received cuts and 

bruises on his wrists, elbow, knee, and head. He was taken to the University 

Medical Center, where he received stitches above his right eye. His medical 

report says that he identified the cause of his injuries as his fall from his 

bicycle. Terrell pleaded guilty to one count of possession of heroin in violation 

of La. Rev. Stat. § 40:966(C)(1), one count of possession with intent to 

distribute Tramadol in violation of La. Rev. Stat. § 40:969(B), and one count 

of resisting an officer in violation of La. Rev. Stat. § 14:108.

Terrell subsequently sued Pichon and Roach for excessive force under 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also brought claims against Captain Darrin Naquin and 

Lieutenant Derrell Williams under § 1983 for failing to supervise and train 

Pichon and Roach. And he brought state-law claims against all four 

defendants based on the same alleged conduct. Terrell subsequently 

dismissed his claims against Roach. 

Terrell alleges that Pichon used excessive force by tasing him and 

hitting, kicking, and dragging him after he fell off his bike. The district court 

granted Pichon summary judgment on the § 1983 claim because it was barred 

by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87 (1994) (“We hold that, in order to 

recover damages for . . . harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would 

 Case: 19-30770 Document: 00515332590 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/04/2020
No. 19-30770

3

render a conviction or sentence invalid, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the 

conviction or sentence 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, 28 U.S.C. § 2254.”). Because Terrell had no viable § 1983 

claim against Pichon, the court also granted summary judgment to Naquin 

and Williams on the § 1983 claims alleging failure to supervise and train.

And because no federal claims remained, the court dismissed Terrell’s statelaw claims.

We agree with the district court’s application of Heck. Our Court has

noted that not every plaintiff’s claim of excessive force will “invariably

invalidate his conviction.” Arnold v. Town of Slaughter, 100 F. App’x 321, 323

(5th Cir. 2004). But when the facts pleaded by a plaintiff necessarily imply 

the invalidity of his conviction, we have held that his claim is Heck-barred.

Id. at 324; see also DeLeon v. City of Corpus Christi, 488 F.3d 649, 656–57

(5th Cir. 2007); Daigre v. City of Waveland, 549 F. App’x 283, 285 (5th Cir. 

2013). In his complaint, Terrell alleges that Pichon used force even though 

Terrell did not resist arrest. Am. Compl. at ¶ 84. Yet Terrell pleaded guilty to 

doing just that—resisting an officer under Louisiana law—which is the exact 

same crime that barred the plaintiff’s claims in Arnold. Because Terrell has 

no § 1983 claim against Pichon, Naquin and Williams are entitled to 

summary judgment on the § 1983 claims against them. And because there 

are no viable federal claims, the state-law claims were rightfully dismissed.

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 19-30770 Document: 00515332590 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/04/2020