From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cockrell v. Bradbury

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 8, 2009
357 F. App'x 130 (9th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 08-55163.

Submitted November 17, 2009.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed December 8, 2009.

Frank B. Cockrell, II, Susanville, CA, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-07-06971-CAS.

Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Frank B. Cockrell, II, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action alleging that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy leading to Cockrell's criminal convictions because judgment in Cockrell's favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of those convictions, and Cockrell has failed to demonstrate that his convictions have been invalidated. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487, 114 S.Ct. 2364.

Cockrell's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Cockrell v. Bradbury

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 8, 2009
357 F. App'x 130 (9th Cir. 2009)
Case details for

Cockrell v. Bradbury

Case Details

Full title:Frank B. COCKRELL, II, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael BRADBURY; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 8, 2009

Citations

357 F. App'x 130 (9th Cir. 2009)