Opinion
Civil Case No. 3:12-1523-KI
08-29-2012
TYRONE BLOCKER, Plaintiff, v. WALTER BEGLAU, MARION COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, PAIGE E. CLARKSON, SALEM POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND OFFICER VANMETER, Defendants.
Tyrone Blocker Pro se Plaintiff
OPINION AND ORDER
Tyrone Blocker
Pro se Plaintiff KING, Judge:
Plaintiff Tyrone Blocker asserts a Section 1983 cause of action for an alleged constitutional violation occurring during his trial on a criminal charge in Marion County Circuit Court. In his Complaint, Blocker alleges the State introduced Blocker's post-Miranda statements through an officer's testimony during its case-in-chief, thereby compelling Blocker to incriminate himself. He alleges, as a result, that he was illegally convicted and imprisoned and is now entitled to $32 million dollars.
In Heck v. Humphrey, the Supreme Court concluded "that, in order to recover damages for [an] allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been" previously invalidated. Heck, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). A conviction can be invalidated by reversal on direct appeal, expungement by executive order, a state tribunal's declaration of invalidity, or by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. This rule prevents a district court from entering a judgment in a civil action that would "necessarily imply the invalidity of [a] conviction or sentence." Id. at 487.
If I weighed in on Blocker's allegations, I would necessarily imply the invalidity of Blocker's conviction and run afoul of Heck. Where a plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the court must dismiss the case if the court determines that the action: "(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Accordingly, because Blocker fails to state a claim on which the court may grant relief, Blocker's complaint must be dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_________________
Garr M. King
United States District Judge