Court Opinion

ID: 2662070
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-04-03 11:42:34.6314+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:59:16.674169
License: Public Domain

~@»»\-¢~»¢.-.u~.~¢.»m¢»-,»<»`~»..403
U.S. 388 (1971), plaintiff sues the Chairman of the United States Parole Commission and other
officials for his alleged "overdetention." Compl. at l. He alleges that the Superior C0urt of the
District of Columbia sentenced him in 1986 to a prison term of seven to 21 years, and that "[i]t is
5 years later [apparently from plaintiffs last parole revocation] and i’m still being held on my
1986 sentence which by court order has fully expired." Id. at 5. Plaintiff seeks from each
defendant SI,OOO for each day he has been incarcerated beyond February 2007 when his sentence

allegedly expired Ia’.

.»-ro~wn~»»~,»»-»>t¢~z»»..~.»»~»~~... ». .. .~ »~, .~ ~ », ,_ ._.., . »e ….». ». ~ . me …,» »....,

Because the success of plaintiffs claim would necessarily void the complained of
custody, plaintiff cannot recover monetary damages without first showing that he has invalidated
the sentence by, inter alia, "a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus." Heck v.
Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994); see accord In re Jorzes, 652 F.3d 36, 37-38 (D.C. Cir.
2011) (A "damages claim that is based on conduct whose unlawfulness would demonstrate the
invalidity of a conviction or sentence is not cognizable unless the conviction or sentence has been
invalidated or called into question by issuance of a writ of habeas corpus."). Since plaintiff has
made no such showing, this action will be dismissed A separate Order accompanies this
Memorandum Opinion.

h/_ Uniteél:St-§tes District Judge

Date:July /?,2012