IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-30506
Summary Calendar
JOHN J. GARRICK and MARYANN GARRICK,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
DALE THIBODEAUX; SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
ACADIA PARISH; JOHN WILSON; TOWN OF
CHURCH POINT; KEN GOSS, and FLOYD LYONS,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 96-CV-1894
- - - - - - - - - -
February 22, 1999
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
John and Maryann Garrick appeal the summary judgment in
favor of all defendants on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims. In
ruling on a summary-judgment motion, a court must review the
facts drawing all inferences most favorable to the party opposing
the motion. See Newell v. Oxford Management, Inc., 912 F.2d 793,
795 (5th Cir. 1990). The district court held that under the
doctrine of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486 (1994), Garrick
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-30506
-2-
was precluded from raising his § 1983 claims. Under Heck, a
§ 1983 plaintiff cannot recover damages for an unconstitutional
conviction or for “harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness
would render a conviction or sentence invalid,” until he has
shown that the conviction or sentence has been “reversed on
direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a
state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called
into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas
corpus.” 512 U.S. at 486-487. Otherwise, such a claim for
damages is not cognizable under § 1983 and must be dismissed.
Id. at 484-486; see Stephenson v. Reno, 28 F.3d 26, 27 (5th Cir.
1994).
John Garrick had been convicted on his plea of nolo
contendere of remaining after being forbidden, disturbing the
peace, resisting arrest, and battery on a police officer. No
evidence or allegation of a reversal or dismissal of the
convictions is in the record. The allegations against the
defendants under § 1983 include assault, battery, unlawful
arrest, racial discrimination, and excessive and unjustified
force. These allegations would directly call into question the
validity of the convictions for resisting arrest and battery of a
police officer. Therefore, even after all inferences most
favorable to the plaintiffs are considered, the defendants have
carried their burden of showing that Garrick’s claims are barred
under Heck, and the Garricks have failed to produce evidence
raising a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v.
No. 98-30506
-3-
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 321 (1986). The summary judgment granted
by the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.