FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT O c t obe r 13, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 16373 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 2 2 4 8 1 - C V- F AM H U N T L E Y H . T H O M P S O N , P la in tif f - A p p e llan t, v ersu s C H A R L E S J . C R I S T , J R ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, K A T H E R I N E F E RN A N D E Z R U N D E L , M ia m i- D a d e C o u n tyS ta te A tto rn e y , T O B Y L . W I L S O N , M I C H A E L H A S S , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ (O ct ob er 13 , 20 06 )2

B efo re D U B IN A , M A R C U S an dW IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A ppe l l a ntH unt l e yT hom ps on, pr oc e e di ng p ro se , ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s d is m is s a l o f

h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 c iv il r ig h ts a c tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 . T ho m pson re qu es t ed thatthe di stri ctcourtcom pel the st at e of F l ori da t o p rodu ce a nd a l l ow i nde pe nde ntt e s t i ng of D N A e vi de nc e us e d i n hi s c r i m i na l tr i a l . T he m ag i strat e j u d g e’ s co n cl u si o n th atT h o m p so n ’ s cl ai m w as fo recl o sedb y H ec k v . H um ph re y , 512 U . S . 477, 114 S . C t . 2364, 129 L . E d. 2d 383 ( 1994) , a nd thus s ubj e c tt o di s m i s s a l f

orf a i l ur e t o s t a t e ac l a i m pur s ua ntt o § 19 15 (e )( 2)(B )( i i ), w as adop t ed by the di stri ctcourt . T ho m pson ar gu es on appeal thatthe di stri ctcourt e rr e d be c aus e i t s de c i s i on w a s i nc ons i s t e ntw i th ouropi ni on i n B radle yv . P r y or , 3 0 5 F .3 d1 2 8 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . We r e v i e w de nov o an appeal fr om a 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5(e) (2)( B )( i i ) di sm i ss al f o rf a ilu r e to s ta te ac la im . L e al v . G e or gi a D e p’ t of C orr e c t i ons , 254 F . 3d 1276, 12 78 -79 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). P ursuantt o 2 8 U . S . C § 1 91 5, the di stri ctcourtm ay di s m i s s ac a s e f

i l e d in fo rm a p a u

p e r is atan y t i m e i f i ti s fri v o l o u s o r m al i ci o u s, fa i l s t o st at e acl ai m up on w hi ch re l i ef m aybe grant ed, or se eks m on et ary r el i ef a g a in s t ad e f

e n d a n t w h o is im m u n e f r o m s u c h r e lie f

. 2 8 U .S .C § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ( iiii) . “A c o m p la in t s h o u ldn o t b e d is m is s e df o rf a ilu r e to s ta te ac la im u n le s s it3

ap p e a r s b e y o n dd o u b t th a t th e p r is o n e rc a n p r o v e n o s e t o f f a c ts in s up p o rt o f

h is cl ai m w hi ch w ou l d ent i t l e hi m t o rel i ef . ” H a rm o n v. B erry , 728 F . 2d 1407, 1409 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 4 ) . “P ro se pl ea di ng s are hel d t o a l es s s tri ng entst andard than pl ea di ng s dra ft ed by att orneys and w i l l , there fore , be l i bera l l y c on strued. ” T an nenb au m v. U

ni ted States , 14 8 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 63 (11th C i r. 19 98 ) ( pe rc ur i am ) . I n H ec k , the S up re m e C ou rthel d that“ i n o rdert o rec ov erdam ages for an a l l e ge dl yunc ons t i tut i ona l c onvi c t i on ori m pr i s onm e nt , orf orothe rha rm c aus e d by ac t i on s w ho se un l aw ful ness w ou l d render a c on vi ct i on or se nt ence i nv al i d, a § 1983 pl a i nt i f

f m us tpr ove tha tthe c onvi c t i on ors e nt e nc e ha s be e n r e ve r s e d on di re ctappeal , expu ng ed by execut i ve order, decl ar ed i nv al i d b y ast at e tri bu nal au th o rize dto m ak e s u ch d eterm in atio n , o r c alledin to q u es ti o n b y afe d er al co u rt’s i ss uance of a w ri tof habeas corpus. ” 512 U . S . at48 6-87 , 11 4 S . C t . at23 72 . If thi s type of

a c t i on i s br oughtpr i ort o the i nva l i da t i on of the c ha l l e nge d c onvi c t i on o rs e n te n c e , it m u s t b e d is m is s e d . H ec k , 5 1 2 U . S . at4 8 7 , 1 1 4 S . C t . at2 3 7 2 . T h u s, “th e d is tr ic t c o u rt m u s t c o n s id e rw h e th e raju d g m e n t in f a v o ro f th e p la in tif

f w o u ld ne c e s s a r i l yi m pl ythe i nva l i di tyof hi s c onvi c t i on ors e nt e nc e ; i f i tw oul d, the c om pl a i ntm us tbe di s m i s s e d unl e s s the pl a i nt i f f c a n de m ons tr a t e tha tthe conv i ct i on or se nt ence has a l re ady bee n i nv al i dat ed. ” I d. H ow ever , “ i f the di stri ct c o u rt d e te rm in e s th a t th e p la in tif f’s a c tio n , e v e n if

s u c c e s s f u l, w ill not

d e m o n s tr a te4

the i nva l i di tyof

a nyout s t a ndi ng c r i m i na l j udgm e nta ga i ns tthe pl a i nt i f f , the a c t i on shou l d b e a l l ow ed t o p roce ed, i n the abse nce of s om e other bar t o the sui t . ” I d. at 51 2 U . S . at48 7, 11 4 S . C t . at23 72 -73. (e m ph as i s i n o ri gi nal ). I n B radley , w e h el dth ata § 1 9 8 3 act i o n seek i n g o n l y p o st -co n v i ct i o n access t o D N A ev i d en ce u seddu ri n g tri al w as n o tb arredb y H ec k b e c au s e p r e v a ilin g in th e a c tio n a n do b ta in in g a c c e s s to th e e v id e n c e w o u ldn o t d e m o n s tr a te o rim p ly th a t th e p r is o n e r ’s u n d e r ly in g c o n v ic tio n w a s in v a lid . B radley , 3 0 5 F .3 da t 1 2 9 0 . I n f a c t , a l l ow i ng a c c e s s t o D N A e vi de nc e f ort e s t i ng “ ne c e s s a r i l yi m pl i e s nothi ng atal l abou tthe pl ai nt i ff’ s c on vi ct i on . ” I d. a t1291. F ore xa m pl e , the r e s ul t s of D N A t es t i ng coul d b e “ i ncon cl usi ve, . . . i nsuffi ci ent l y e xcul pat ory, or they m ay even be i ncul pat ory. ” I d. “ T hatthese sc i ent i fi c possibi l i t i es exi st , i n and of i t se l f, suff i ce s t o est abl i sh thatthe as se rt ed ri gh tof m er e a cc es s i s nota di re ct , or for that m att ereven an i nd i re ct , att ac k o n o ne’ s c on vi ct i on or se nt ence . ” I d. E ven i f a pl ai nt i ff “ i s s ucce ss ful i n h i s l aw sui t , hi s c on vi ct i on and sent ence w i l l no tbe ca l l ed i nt o q uest i on , si nce the on l y thi ng he w i l l have se cure d i s a cc es s t o evi dence. ” I d. a t1 2 9 2 . I n s t e a d , h e “ w o u l dh a v e t o i n i t i a t e a n e n t i r e l ys e p a r a t e a c t i o n a ts o me future dat e, i n w hi ch he w ou l d h ave t o argue for hi s r el ea se up on the basi s of a se para t e c on st i tut i on alvi ol at i on al t og ether. ” I d. a t1291. B e c aus e T hom ps on s e e ks a c c e s s t o D N A e vi de nc e us e d dur i ng hi s tr i a l , a nd5

de ni e s tha the i s c ha l l e ngi ng hi s c onvi c t i on, w e c onc l ude tha thi s a c t i on i s not b arredb y H

ec k . See 5 1 2 U .S . 4 8 6 - 8 7 , 1 1 4 S . C t. a t 2 3 7 2 ; B radley , 30 5 F . 3d at 1291. T hus , w e hol d tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d byr e l y i ng on H ec k a s gr ounds f

or c onc l udi ng tha tT hom ps on f a i l e d t o s t a t e ac l a i m pur s ua ntt o § 1915, a nd consequent l y f

ai l i ng t o add re ss w hether he s uffi ci ent l y s t at ed a § 1 9 8 3 c la im . A c c or di ngl y , w e r e ve r s e the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e nta nd r e m a nd thi s m a tt e rf or f u rth e rp r o c e e d in g s to d e te rm in e w h e th e rT h o m p s o n ’s c o m p la in t s u f f ic ie n tly al l eged a § 1983 c aus e of a c t i on. RE V E RS E D a n d RE MAND E D.