Case Name: Warren J. DARICK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rex JOHNSON, Individually and as a Director of the State Department of Transportation of the State of Hawaii; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-13
Citations: 55 F. App'x 867
Docket Number: No. 02-15802; D.C. No. CV-01-00135-DAE/KSC
Parties: Warren J. DARICK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rex JOHNSON, Individually and as a Director of the State Department of Transportation of the State of Hawaii; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 867–867

Head Matter:
Warren J. DARICK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rex JOHNSON, Individually and as a Director of the State Department of Transportation of the State of Hawaii; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-15802.
D.C. No. CV-01-00135-DAE/KSC.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 10, 2003.
Decided Feb. 13, 2003.
Before LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Warren J. Darick appeals pro se the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that state, county, and city employees violated his civil rights by issuing two speeding tickets for which he was subsequently found guilty and fined by a Hawaii state court. Darick also appeals the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant Hayashida. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816, 817 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc., 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998).
The district court was required to dismiss Darick's action against all the defendants because a judgment in his favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his convictions for speeding, and' Darick did not demonstrate that the convictions had been invalidated. See Cabrera v. City of Huntington Park, 159 F.3d 374, 380 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam) (citing Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994)).
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.