Opinion
Case: 1:16-cv-01986
10-04-2016
Joseph Kinard, Plaintiff, v. United States et al., Defendants.
(F-Deck)
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 10/6/2016
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil Jury Demand
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia prisoner proceeding pro se, has submitted a Complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal of a prisoner's case upon a determination that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted).
Plaintiff sues the United States and the District of Columbia under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He seeks $29 million in money damages and his immediate release "for [his] wrongful imprisonment and malicious prosecution[.]" Compl. at 5. Notwithstanding that § 1983 does not apply to the United States and applies to the District under limited circumstances not alleged here, plaintiff's claims are not "cognizable unless and until he meets the requirements of Heck" by having the sentence invalidated via direct appeal or habeas corpus, or declared void by an authorized tribunal. Harris v. Fulwood, 611 Fed. App'x. 1, 2 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (citing Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994)). "Heck applies 'no matter the relief sought (damages or equitable relief) . . . if success in [the] action would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of confinement or its duration.'" Id. (quoting Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, the invalidity of confinement or its duration.'" Id. (quoting Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81-82 (2005) (alterations in original)).
The underlying conviction and sentence have not been invalidated, see United States v. Kinctrd, 1996 FEL 010034 (D.C. Super. Ct.), and "[o]ne element that must be alleged and proved in a malicious prosecution action is termination of the prior criminal proceeding in favor of the accused," In re Jones, 652 F.3d 36, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (quoting Heck, 512 U.S. at 484) (alteration and emphasis in original)). Accordingly, this action will be dismissed without prejudice. A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/_________
United States District Judge Date: October 4, 2016