Castaneda v. Shelby County Sheriff's Office et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/16/2015. (JLC)
2015 Oct-16 AM 10:51
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SHELBY COUNTY SHERIFF’S
OFFICE, et al.,
Case No. 2:14-cv-02337-VEH-HGD
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The magistrate judge filed a report on August 20, 2015, recommending that this
action be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). The plaintiff filed objections
to the report and recommendation on September 11, 2015. (Doc. 19).
The plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge’s finding that his claims are barred
by the doctrine set forth in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Citing Murray
v. United States, 487 U.S. 533, 539 (1988), he contends that because his claims here
involve unreasonable search issues and denial of adequate medical care issues, they
would not “necessarily” imply the invalidity of his conviction and therefore would
Page 1 of 2
not violate Heck.1 However, the magistrate judge correctly noted that any claims
outside the purview of Heck would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
Therefore, assuming arguendo that the plaintiff’s objections regarding the Heck issue
have merit, this action is still due to be dismissed by reason of the expiration of the
statute of limitations, and his objections with regard to Heck are moot.
Accordingly, having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the
materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation and the plaintiff’s
objections thereto, the court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s report is due
to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. Therefore,
in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), this action is due to be dismissed
without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A
Final Judgment will be entered contemporaneously herewith.
DATED this 16th day of October, 2015.
VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
United States District Judge
The plaintiff acknowledges that his claims alleging conspiracy between prosecutors and the
state court could be barred by Heck, but argues that those claims should have been reviewed in light
of the holding in Murray, and only after service on the defendants and a “chance of discovery.” (Doc.
19 at 4).
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?