Williams v. Anne Arundel County Police Department et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on 8/7/2017. (c/m 08/08/2017 - jf3s, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
KELL Y ANTHONY WILLIAMS

*

Plaintiff

*

v.

*

ANNE ARUNDEL CO. POLICE DEPT.,
ROBIN RICKARD,
CPL. HENRY AFFELDT, and
JOHN HAMMANN

*

Civil Action No. PWG-17-1913

*
*

Defendants

***
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kelly Williams filed this civil rights action on July 10, 2017, along with a Motion to
Proceed in Forma Pauperis, ECF No.2, which shall be granted.
Plaintiff, an inmate at Maryland Correctional Institution Hagerstown, seeks $3 million to
$6 million in damages from each Defendant, all of whom participated in his criminal case.
Williams was convicted of possession with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance
and firearms possession in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland.
Kelly

Anthony

Williams,

Case No.

http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry.

111001315585

(Anne

Arundel

Co.

See State v.
Cir.

Ct.),

at

Williams now alleges that his constitutional rights

were violated because his attorney, John Hammann, stipulated to a firearms test that Williams
later discovered was never performed. ECF NO.1.

He claims this violated his constitutional

rights.
The complaint must be dismissed without prejudice because Williams has not yet
successfully challenged his conviction and it remains valid.

In Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U. S.

477, 487 (1994), the Supreme Court held that claims challenging the legality of a conviction are

not cognizable in a 42 U.S.C.

S

1983 action unless and until the conviction is reversed,

expunged, invalidated, or impugned, and complaints containing such claims must therefore be
dismissed without prejudice.

See also Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 645 (1997) (Heck

precludes claims that necessarily imply the invalidity of the judgment).

Litigation of Plaintiffs

claim in this Court would require consideration of matters that, if established as true, would
imply the underlying criminal conviction is not valid. Thus, by separate Order which follows,
the complaint shall be dismissed without prejudic .

JJt{{t
Date

Paul W. rimm
United States District Judge

2