Brown v. Quian

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: August 18, 2023
• Docket: 23-20083
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 23-20083 Document: 00516862919 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED August 18, 2023 No. 23-20083 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

Avivia Luciana Brown,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

S. H. Quian, Officer; P. T. Rubio, Officer,

Defendants—Appellants. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20-CV-862 ______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The defendants in this interlocutory appeal challenge the district court’s denial, in part, of their motion to dismiss Avivia Luciana Brown’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. In support of their appeal, the defendants contend that, contrary to the district court’s ruling, Brown did not allege facts showing that they violated her constitutional rights, they were entitled

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-20083 Document: 00516862919 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2023

No. 23-20083

to qualified immunity, and Brown’s claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). We have jurisdiction to review these arguments. See Poole v. City of Shreveport, 13 F.4th 420, 426 (5th Cir. 2021); Armstrong v. Ashley, 918 F.3d 419, 422 (5th Cir. 2019). Accepting Brown’s allegations as true and in a light most favorable to her, see Ramirez v. Guadarrama, 3 F.4th 129, 133 (5th Cir. 2021), the district court did not err in determining that Brown had stated a claim for relief under the Fourth Amendment and that the defendants’ alleged actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law, see Ramirez v. Martinez, 716 F.3d 369, 379 (5th Cir. 2013); Newman v. Guedry, 703 F.3d 757, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2012); Spann v. Rainey, 987 F.2d 1110, 1112, 1115 (5th Cir. 1993). Last, the district court correctly determined that Heck has no bearing, given the finding that the prosecutor dismissed the criminal charge against Brown before trial, and the prosecution against Brown in state court ended without a conviction. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87. Accordingly, the district court’s ruling is AFFIRMED.