Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Silas Mobley v. Anne Tompkins, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving plaintiff Silas Mobley appealing the dismissal of his civil action challenging his federal convictions. The district court dismissed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), finding that Mobley had not shown his convictions were overturned or invalid as required by Heck v. Humphrey. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal but modified the district court's order to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice to allow Mobley to refile if his convictions were later overturned or called into question by the appropriate court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-05-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6276

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving plaintiff Silas Mobley appealing the dismissal of his civil action challenging his federal convictions. The district court dismissed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), finding that Mobley had not shown his convictions were overturned or invalid as required by Heck v. Humphrey. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal but modified the district court's order to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice to allow Mobley to refile if his convictions were later overturned or called into question by the appropriate court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views3 pages

    Silas Mobley v. Anne Tompkins, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving plaintiff Silas Mobley appealing the dismissal of his civil action challenging his federal convictions. The district court dismissed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), finding that Mobley had not shown his convictions were overturned or invalid as required by Heck v. Humphrey. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal but modified the district court's order to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice to allow Mobley to refile if his convictions were later overturned or called into question by the appropriate court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-6276

    SILAS MOBLEY,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    ANNE M. TOMPKINS; ROBERT CONRAD,
    DAVID A. KEESLER; JAMES BRYANT,

    JR.;

    RICHARD

    CULLER;

    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
    Malcolm J. Howard,
    Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00212-MJH)

    Submitted:

    May 24, 2012

    Before MOTZ and


    Circuit Judge.

    DAVIS,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    Judges,

    and

    May 31, 2012

    HAMILTON,

    Senior

    Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Silas Junior Mobley, Appellant Pro Se.


    Paul Bradford Taylor,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,
    for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Silas

    Mobley

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    dismissing under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(1) (2006) his civil action


    challenging

    his

    federal

    injunctive relief.

    convictions

    and

    seeking

    damages

    and

    The district court properly dismissed the

    action because Mobley has not shown that his convictions have
    been overturned or called into question.

    See Heck v. Humphrey,

    512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994) (holding that a 42 U.S.C. 1983


    (2006) suit for monetary damages is barred if prevailing in the
    action

    would

    necessarily

    require

    the

    plaintiff

    to

    prove

    the

    unlawfulness of his conviction); Harvey v. Horan, 278 F.3d 370,


    375

    (4th

    Cir.

    relief),

    2002)

    abrogated

    (applying

    on

    other

    Heck

    grounds

    to

    claims

    by

    for

    Skinner

    injunctive

    v.

    Switzer,

    131 S. Ct. 1289, 1298-1300 (2011); Clemente v. Allen, 120 F.3d


    703,

    705

    (7th

    Cir.

    1997)

    (per

    curiam)

    (stating

    that

    the

    rationale in Heck applies to actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown


    Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)).
    However,
    reflect

    that

    the

    we

    modify

    dismissal

    the
    is

    district

    without

    courts

    prejudice

    to

    order

    to

    Mobleys

    ability to re-file his claims if his federal convictions are


    overturned or called into question by the appropriate court and
    affirm the order as modified.

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

    in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED

    You might also like