Case Name: Colvin McCRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Arnold SCHWARZENEGGER; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-04-20
Citations: 376 F. App'x 795
Docket Number: No. 08-16994
Parties: Colvin McCRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Arnold SCHWARZENEGGER; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 376
Pages: 795–796

Head Matter:
Colvin McCRIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Arnold SCHWARZENEGGER; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-16994.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 5, 2010.
Filed April 20, 2010.
Colvin McCright, Crescent City, CA, pro se.
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Colvin McCright, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because a judgment in McCright's favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his sentence, and his sen tence has not been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2864, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). McCright's reliance on Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 125 S.Ct. 1242, 161 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005), is unpersuasive.
McCright's motion for default judgment is denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.