Case Name: Alvaro RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of CALIFORNIA, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-29
Citations: 324 F. App'x 671
Docket Number: No. 08-15207
Parties: Alvaro RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of CALIFORNIA, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 324
Pages: 671–671

Head Matter:
Alvaro RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of CALIFORNIA, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 08-15207.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2009.
Filed April 29, 2009.
Alvaro Rodriguez, San Leandro, CA, pro se.
Paul T. Hammerness, Esquire, AGCA— Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appel-lee.
Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Alvaro Rodriguez, a former California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing as Necfc-barred his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging two misdemeanor convictions from 1993. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Sacks v. Office of Foreign Assets Control, 466 F.3d 764, 770 (9th Cir.2006). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Rodriguez's action because a judgment in Rodriguez's favor would necessarily imply the validity of his convictions, and Rodriguez failed to allege that his convictions were reversed, expunged, or otherwise called into question. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2864, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994).
Rodriguez's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.