Steven Volner v. David Mabe

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 24-1007

___________________________

Steven L. Volner,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant,

v.

David Mabe, Deputy; Crawford County Sheriff’s Department,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

____________

Submitted: April 2, 2024 Filed: April 19, 2024

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, Chief Judge, BENTON and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Steven Volner appeals following the preservice dismissal of his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Volner claimed that his rights were violated by an illegal search. The district court concluded that Volner’s unlawful search-andseizure claim under the Fourth Amendment was barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), based on a state conviction for possession of a controlled substance

2

that arose from evidence discovered in the search. On appeal, Volner argues that his claim was not barred by Heck.

On de novo review, we conclude that Volner’s unlawful search-and-seizure claim was not barred by Heck because success on the claim would not necessarily imply the invalidity of his state conviction. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487 n.7; Whitmore v. Harrington, 204 F.3d 784, 784-85 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam); Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171-72 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam). Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal and remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We express no view on whether any defendant or claim may be subject to dismissal for any other reason. We overrule Volner’s objection to no-argument classification and deny Volner’s request for appointment of amicus curiae to defend the judgment.

______________________________