Opinion
Civil Action No. 08 1128.
June 19, 2008
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court upon consideration of Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint will be dismissed.
Plaintiff states that he has been confined since October 10, 1007. Compl. ¶ 3. He further states that he was convicted in and sentenced by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in March 2008. Id. Pursuant to the terms of a plea bargain, the court imposed a sentence of "six months and 90 days concurrent on the J C order for service in jail." Id. According to plaintiff he currently is detained illegally because "he should have been released on April 7, 2008." Id. Plaintiff alleges that his current detention violates his rights protected by the Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, see id. ¶ 2, and he demands compensatory and punitive damages. Id. ¶¶ 5-6.
Plaintiff's claim for damages in this civil rights action challenging the fact or duration of confinement must fail. Plaintiff must first establish that his confinement has been invalidated by "revers[al] on direct appeal, expunge[ment] by executive order, declar[ation of invalidity] by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or . . . a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus." Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994); accord White v. Bowie, 194 F.3d 175 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (table). Plaintiff has not satisfied the prerequisite and therefore fails to state a claim.
Insofar as plaintiff demands his immediate release from custody, the proper means to do so is by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the district where he currently is incarcerated. See Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804, 809 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 490 (1973)).
The Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued separately on this same date.