Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Roseby v. Budlow, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Douglas Roseby's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had dismissed the complaint as not cognizable under Heck v. Humphrey because § 1983 claims that would imply the invalidity of a conviction cannot be brought unless the conviction has been overturned. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-05-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-6937

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Douglas Roseby's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had dismissed the complaint as not cognizable under Heck v. Humphrey because § 1983 claims that would imply the invalidity of a conviction cannot be brought unless the conviction has been overturned. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    0 views2 pages

    Roseby v. Budlow, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Douglas Roseby's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice. The district court had dismissed the complaint as not cognizable under Heck v. Humphrey because § 1983 claims that would imply the invalidity of a conviction cannot be brought unless the conviction has been overturned. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-6937

    MR. DOUGLAS M. ROSEBY,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    MR. PAUL E. BUDLOW, et al.,
    Defendant Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    Alexander Williams, Jr., District
    Judge. (8:10-cv-00417-AW)

    Submitted:

    April 14, 2011

    Decided:

    May 3, 2011

    Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Douglas M. Roseby, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Douglas M. Roseby appeals the district courts order
    dismissing

    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2006)

    complaint,

    without

    prejudice, as not cognizable under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.


    477 (1994).
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

    Accordingly, we affirm the district courts order.

    See

    Roseby v. Budlow, No. 8:10-cv-00417-AW (D. Md. Mar. 9, 2010).


    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

    You might also like