McCright v. Schwarzenegger
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Colvin McCright, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because a judgment in McCright’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his sentence, and his sen[796] tence has not been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2864, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). McCright’s reliance on Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 125 S.Ct. 1242, 161 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005), is unpersuasive.
McCright’s motion for default judgment is denied.
AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
376 F. App'x 795 (McCright v. Schwarzenegger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.