Opinion
CASE NO. 5:10-cv-38/MW/EMT
03-19-2013
KEVIN ANTHONY MOORE, Plaintiff, v. MIKE HARRIS and WARDEN MARK HENRY, Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
The Court has considered the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, ECF No.88, filed March 1, 2013. The Court has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff's Objection to Report and Recommendation of Magistrate, ECF No.89, filed March 15, 2013. Upon consideration,
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted as the court's opinion and this Court notes the following.
Plaintiff attempts to avoid the application of the statute of limitations by seeking shelter under the Heck accrual rule. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 489-90 (1994). Heck, however, does not apply. Heck prohibits an action under § 42 U.S.C. 1983 if "a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence," "unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated." Id. at 487.
Here, neither the conviction nor sentence is implicated. The thrust of Plaintiff's argument is that the status of being a sex offender and the associated registration requirements implicate his "sentence" for purposes of Heck. Contrary to Plaintiff's view, the Supreme Court has made clear that the word "sentence" as used in Heck refers to "substantive determinations as to the length of confinement." Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 83 (2005). It is for this reason that Heck's application has logically extended to cases involving deprivation of gain time as a result of disciplinary proceedings. See, e.g., Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 645-48 (1997). Inasmuch the length of Plaintiff's confinement is not implicated, Heck has no application in this case.
The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, "Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED; judgment is entered in favor of Defendants." The Clerk shall close the file.
Mark E. Walker
United States District Judge