From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hackworth v. Rangel

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Sep 25, 2012
482 F. App'x 299 (9th Cir. 2012)

Summary

vacating district court's grant of summary judgment because success on excessive force claim would not necessarily invalidate disciplinary conviction

Summary of this case from Singanonh v. Fine

Opinion

No. 11-17538 D.C. No. 1:06-cv-00850-AWI-MJS

09-25-2012

ROBERT HACKWORTH, Jr., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. P. RANGEL, Correctional Officer, Defendant - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Anthony W. Ishii, Chief Judge, Presiding


Submitted September 10, 2012

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
--------

Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Robert Hackworth Jr. appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir. 2003). We vacate and remand.

The district court granted summary judgment on Hackworth's excessive force claim on the basis that it was barred under Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997) and Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). However, success on the merits of Hackworth's excessive force claim does not necessarily imply the invalidity of his of rule-violation conviction. See, e.g., Smith v. City of Hemet, 394 F.3d 689, 693 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (§ 1983 action was not barred by Heck because "the excessive force may have been employed against [plaintiff] subsequent to the time he engaged in the conduct that constituted the basis for his conviction"). Furthermore, the rule established in Heck is not an evidentiary doctrine and, therefore, cannot bar evidence in a § 1983 action. See Simpson v. Thomas, 528 F.3d 685, 696 (9th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we vacate the district court's summary judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Hackworth v. Rangel

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Sep 25, 2012
482 F. App'x 299 (9th Cir. 2012)

vacating district court's grant of summary judgment because success on excessive force claim would not necessarily invalidate disciplinary conviction

Summary of this case from Singanonh v. Fine

In Hackworth v. Rangel, 482 Fed.Appx. 299 (2012), the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's summary judgment against Hackworth, noting that "success on the merits of Hackworth's excessive force claim does not necessarily imply the invalidity of his rule-violation conviction."

Summary of this case from Hackworth v. Torres
Case details for

Hackworth v. Rangel

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT HACKWORTH, Jr., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. P. RANGEL, Correctional…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Sep 25, 2012

Citations

482 F. App'x 299 (9th Cir. 2012)

Citing Cases

Stein v. City of San Diego

"[S]uccess on the merits of [Plaintiff's] excessive force claim does not necessarily imply the invalidity of…

Singanonh v. Fine

. 1:06-cv-0773 RC, 2013 WL 3815882, at *4-5, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102266, at *11-16 (E.D. Cal July 22, 2013)…