# U n i ted S t a te s Cou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-7011 September Term, 2021 1: 20-cv -027 97-UNA Filed O n: July 14, 2 022 Prince Jo nes,App ellant
v . District of

Colum bia, et a l., App ellees
ON A PPE A L FROM THE UNITED STA TES DIS TRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BEFORE: Hend erson , W ilkins, an d K atsa s, Circuit Jud ges J U D G M E N T T his ap pea l was co nside red o n th e reco rd f rom the United Sta tes District Cou rt for th e District of

Colum bia a nd on the briefs f iled b y the pa rties. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P

. 34(a )(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34 (j). Upon consid eratio n o f the foregoing, an d th e m otion to app oint coun sel, th e m otion to supp lem entthe record and the lodged ad den dum , an d the m otion for lea ve to f ile a st ate me nt o f no n-po sition a nd mo tion for sum ma ry af f irman ce, it is ORDERED tha t th e m otion to app oint coun sel be de nied . In civ il cases, app ellant s are noten titled to a ppo intm entof cou nsel when the y

ha ve n ot d em onst rated suf f icient likeliho od of

succe ss on the m erits. I t is FURTHER ORDERED tha t th e m otion to supp lem entthe record be grant ed. T he Clerk is directed to f ile the lodged ad den dum . Itis FURTHER ORDERED A ND ADJUDGED tha t th e d istrict court’s o rders en tered on Octob er 30 , 20 20 (dismissing ap pellan t’s com plaint ), Decem ber 1 1, 2 020 (den y ing

# U n i ted S t a te s Cou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-7011 September Term, 2021

app ellant ’s mo tion to re ope n th e ca se), a nd Decem ber 1 6, 2 020 (den y ing app ellant ’s mo tion for relief

pu rsuan t to Fed eral Rule of Civ il Proced ure 5 9(e)) be af f irmed

. W ith resp ect t o a ll of

ap pellan t’s claim s except h is false a rrest claim an d h is claim und er th e Fo urth Am end me nt re lated to the warrantle ss use of a ce ll-si te simu lator, the district co urt co rrectly he ld th at a ppe llant’s claim s are barred pu rsuan t to Heck v. Hump hrey, 512 U.S. 477 (199 4). Afavorable ruling on an y of tho se claim s would ne cessarily

imp ly the invalidity

of his co nviction an d se nte nce arising from his guilty plea , an d h e h as n ot d em onst rated tha t th at co nviction or se nte nce has bee n overturned or o the rw ise invalidate d. Id. at 4 86-8 7. W ith resp ect t o a ppe llant’s ce ll-si te sim ulato r claim a nd false a rrest claim , th e court af f irms on a groun d o the r tha n th at a rticulate d b y the district co urt. See Cham bers v. Burwell, 824 F.3d 14 1, 1 43 (D.C. Cir. 2016 ) (court m ay af f irm on an y groun d su ppo rted by the re cord). T he Sup erior Court judge a ppe llees a re en titled to imm unity f rom the se claim s, see Sind ram v . Su da, 98 6 F.2 d 1 459 , 14 60 (D.C. Cir. 199 3), a s is ap pellee La z arus, see Im bler v. Pach tm an, 42 4 U.S . 40 9, 4 30 (197 6). Likewise, the po lice of

f icer ap pellee s are ent itled t o qualif ied im mu nity fro m claims for dam ages “so lo ng as th eir con duct‘doe s no t violate clea rly esta blished stat uto ry

or const itution al rights of

w hich a reaso nab le pe rson would h ave known.’” Mullenix v

. Lun a, 5 77 U.S. 7 , 11 (201 5) (quoting Pe arson v. Callahan , 55 5 U.S . 22 3, 2 31 (200 9)). Beca use the un const itution ality of the of f icers’ warrantle ss use of a ce ll-si te sim ulato r was n ot “clea rly

esta blished ” at t he time the y en gaged in th at co ndu ct, a nd beca use app ellant ’s allegation tha t he was a rrested w ithou t pro bab le cau se a rises f rom tha t unco nstitu tiona l use, qualif ied im mu nity shields th em f rom the se claim s. Fu rtherm ore, app ellantdo es n ot ra ise in h is brief an y argume nts linkin g either a ppe llee B owser or the District of

Colum bia t o th ese claims. Se e Unite d S tate s ex rel. T otte n v. Bom bard ier Corp., 380 F.3d 48 8, 4 97 (D.C. Cir. 2004 ) (arg um ent s no t raised on ap pea l are forfeited ). It is FURTHER ORDERED tha t th e m otion for lea ve to f ile a st ate me nt o f no npositio n a nd mo tion for sum ma ry af f irman ce b e d ismissed as m oot . A ppe llant h as raised no claims against a ppe llee W hiteh ead relate d to the cell-site sim ulato r or false arrest issue s, an d h as th erefore forfeited an y such claim s. S ee T otte n, 3 80 F.3d at 497

. Page 2

# U n i ted S t a te s Cou r t o f Appe a l s F OR T HE D IS TRICT OF C OLUM BIA C IRCUI T

___ ___ ___ ___ 

## No. 21-7011 September Term, 2021
Pursua nt t o D.C. Circuit Ru le 36 , th is dispo sition will no t be pu blished . T he Clerk is directe d to w ithho ld issua nce of the m and ate he rein u ntil seven d ays af ter reso lution of an y tim ely petition for rehe aring or pe tition for rehe aring en ban c. S ee Fed. R. Ap p. P. 4 1(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41

. Per Curiam

Page 3