CA11: No Heck bar for § 1983 false arrest claim over dismissed criminal count

The district court erred in dismissing plaintiff’s § 1983 false arrest claim against the deputy on Heck grounds because Heck did not apply–the charge that formed the basis for his § 1983 claim was dismissed, and his § 1983 suit challenging his trespassing arrest did not share a common element with his state convictions for harassing phone calls and marijuana possession arising from different incidents. His malicious arrest claim against the deputy under state law was properly dismissed because the state dismissed the criminal charge based on a compromise agreement. Thus, it did not terminate in his favor. Henley v. Payne, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 38625 (11th Cir. Dec. 30, 2019).*

Defendant was not denied any right to cross-examine witnesses at the suppression hearing where there were none called. United States v. Rosebar, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 38632 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 27, 2019).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.