Case Name: Granville ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Camille BURAS; Eddie Jordan; Auther Morel; Floyd Truhill; Myrtle Gathe Thompson; Stacey Thompson; Latoya Gathe; Louisiana State; Unidentified Parties; Martin Regan; Karla Baker; Aris Cox; Thomas Calogero; Aaron Rives; James Buddy Caldwell, Attorney General, State of Louisiana, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-13
Citations: 701 F. App'x 371
Docket Number: No. 16-31171 Summary Calendar
Parties: Granville ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Camille BURAS; Eddie Jordan; Auther Morel; Floyd Truhill; Myrtle Gathe Thompson; Stacey Thompson; Latoya Gathe; Louisiana State; Unidentified Parties; Martin Regan; Karla Baker; Aris Cox; Thomas Calogero; Aaron Rives; James Buddy Caldwell, Attorney General, State of Louisiana, Defendants-Appellees
Judges: Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 701
Pages: 371–371

Head Matter:
Granville ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Camille BURAS; Eddie Jordan; Auther Morel; Floyd Truhill; Myrtle Gathe Thompson; Stacey Thompson; Latoya Gathe; Louisiana State; Unidentified Parties; Martin Regan; Karla Baker; Aris Cox; Thomas Calogero; Aaron Rives; James Buddy Caldwell, Attorney General, State of Louisiana, Defendants-Appellees
No. 16-31171 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed November 13, 2017
Granville Rose, Pro Se
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Granville Rose filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against several defendants to raise several claims concerning his conviction for sexual battery. The district court dismissed the suit as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), and denied the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion that Rose filed with respect to that judgment. Rose now appeals the district court's denial of his Rule 60(b) motion, and he has also filed several motions with this court requesting various forms of relief. Rose has not shown that the district court abused its discretion by denying his Rule 60(b) motion. See Diaz v. Stephens, 731 F.3d 370, 374 (5th Cir. 2013). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED, and all outstanding motions are DENIED.
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 court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5:4.