FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANDRE BRIGHAM YOUNG, No. 08-35640
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:06-cv-01687-JCC
v.
MEMORANDUM *
STATE OF WASHINGTON; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2010 **
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Andre Brigham Young, a former Washington state prisoner and current civil
detainee, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JK/Research
§ 1983 action as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Whitaker v. Garcetti,
486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
The district court properly dismissed the action as Heck-barred because a
judgment in Young’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his
conviction, and Young failed to allege that his conviction has been invalidated.
See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87; Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1139-40
(9th Cir. 2005) (applying Heck to civil detainees). However, we vacate the
judgment to the extent that it dismissed the action with prejudice, and remand for
entry of dismissal without prejudice. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d
583, 585 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (stating that dismissals under Heck are
without prejudice).
We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Smith
v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999).
The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.
AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.
JK/Research 2 08-35640