Filed: Apr. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50925 Conference Calendar OTIS BELSER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-98-CV-409 - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Otis Belser (TDCJ # 286377) appeals the dismissal of his pro se civil rights complaint wherein he asserted that his calendar time and good-tim
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50925 Conference Calendar OTIS BELSER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-98-CV-409 - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Otis Belser (TDCJ # 286377) appeals the dismissal of his pro se civil rights complaint wherein he asserted that his calendar time and good-time..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50925
Conference Calendar
OTIS BELSER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-98-CV-409
--------------------
April 11, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Otis Belser (TDCJ # 286377) appeals the dismissal of his pro
se civil rights complaint wherein he asserted that his calendar
time and good-time credits unconstitutionally were forfeited
after he was reincarcerated on a parole violation. The district
court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim in
accordance with Heck v. Humphrey,
512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994).
To recover monetary damages for an allegedly
unconstitutional imprisonment, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that
his conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal,
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-50925
-2-
expunged by executive order, declared invalid by an authorized
state tribunal, or called into question by a federal court's
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87. A § 1983 plaintiff also must prove
that a sentence imposed as a result of a revocation proceeding
has been invalidated by a state or federal court. McGrew v.
Texas Bd. of Pardons & Paroles,
47 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir. 1995);
see also Littles v. Board of Pardons and Paroles Div.,
68 F.3d
122, 123 (5th Cir. 1995). Because Belser has not shown that the
sentence imposed upon the revocation of his parole was
invalidated by any court, the district court did not err by
dismissing Belser’s complaint for failure to state a claim. See
Blackburn v. City of Marshall,
42 F.3d 925, 931 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.