Case Name: Dana Lynn ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ray W. PATERSON; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-19
Citations: 152 F. App'x 589
Docket Number: No. 04-36033
Parties: Dana Lynn ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ray W. PATERSON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: T.G. NELSON, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 152
Pages: 589–590

Head Matter:
Dana Lynn ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ray W. PATERSON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-36033.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 11, 2005.
Decided Oct. 19, 2005.
Dana Lynn Rose, Boise, ID, pro se.
Before: T.G. NELSON, TALLMAN, 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
Dana Lynn Rose, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and 1915A, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the court reporter at his criminal trial and subsequent hearings falsified the transcripts of the proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. After de novo review, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), we affirm.
A prisoner's civil rights claim for damages attributable to an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid does not accrue until his sentence or fact of imprisonment has been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 483-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). Because the assessment of damage, if any, for an inaccurate transcript would be measured by its effect on Rose's ability to challenge his criminal conviction on appeal, we conclude that this claim is precluded by Heck. See Butterfield v. Bail, 120 F.3d 1023, 1025 (9th Cir.1997).
Rose's remaining contentions lack merit..
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.