Manuel Burruel, III v. Rob Bonta
This text of Manuel Burruel, III v. Rob Bonta (Manuel Burruel, III v. Rob Bonta) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 18 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MANUEL BURRUEL, III, No. 23-15065
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:22-cv-00116-ADA-EPG
v. MEMORANDUM * ROB BONTA, California Attorney General,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Ana de Alba, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 10, 2023**
Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Manuel Burruel, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising
from his civil commitment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
review de novo. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)); Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th
Cir. 2007) (dismissal under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Burruel’s constitutional claims as
Heck-barred because success on his claims would necessarily imply the invalidity
of his civil commitment, and Burruel has not demonstrated that his commitment
has been invalidated. See Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1140-41 (9th
Cir. 2005) (holding that a plaintiff’s claims are Heck-barred where the success of
his § 1983 claim “would necessarily imply the invalidity of his civil
commitment”); see also Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87 (holding that if “a judgment in
favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or
sentence . . . the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate
that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated”). Contrary to
Burruel’s contention, the district court did not err by construing this case as a
§ 1983 action.
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 23-15065
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Manuel Burruel, III v. Rob Bonta, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manuel-burruel-iii-v-rob-bonta-ca9-2023.