DARRYL BURGHARDT V. ERIK SHEAR, No. 18-55548 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 22 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DARRYL BURGHARDT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 18-55548 D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01986-JAK-DFM MEMORANDUM* ERIK SHEAR, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 17, 2021** Before: FERNANDEZ, BYBEE, and BADE, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Darryl Burghardt appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a due process violation from the photographic identification process used in his arrest and conviction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Burghardt’s action as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), because success on his claim would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence, and Burghardt failed to allege facts sufficient to show that his conviction had been invalidated. See id. at 486-87 (if “a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence . . . the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated”). AFFIRMED. 2 18-55548

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.