Opinion ID: 173028
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: 3d at 1180 (citation omitted).

Text: “If a state entity is more like a political subdivision—such as a county or city—than it is like an instrumentality of the state, that entity is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity.” Steadfast, 507 F.3d at 1253 (citation omitted). Based on Kirby’s complaint, it is clear that the Division is an arm of the state, entitling it and its employees Fulton and Schultz, to Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Ruiz, 299 F.3d at 1180 (relying on complaint’s allegations in determining state department was an arm of state). F Kirby also alleged that Las Cruces Mayor Bill Mattiace made a bomb threat and later perjured himself at Kirby’s criminal trial. In addition, Kirby asserted that detective Ricky Madrid and investigator J.D. Jones refused to charge Mattiace for the bomb threat and conspired with state officials to file securities charges against Kirby. Rather than addressing the grounds on which the district court dismissed these claims (including the failure to state a claim for relief and the lack of any state action on Mattiace’s part) Kirby argues on appeal that he was injured by a conspiracy between these defendants. This recast conspiracy claim also fails because the only possible injury that can be inferred from the alleged misconduct is either Kirby’s resulting criminal conviction itself or damages arising therefrom. -11- Any such claims are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994), which holds that a plaintiff may not recover damages for “harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid” unless the plaintiff can first prove that the conviction “has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.” Kirby has not made such a showing.