Blocker v. Beglan et al, No. 3:2012cv01523 - Document 9 (D. Or. 2012)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Because Plaintiff fails to state a claim on which the court may grant relief, plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed without prejudice Signed on 8/29/12 by Judge Garr M. King. (see formal order) (kb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION TYRONE BLOCKER, Plaintiff, v. WALTER BEGLAU, MARION COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, PAIGE E. CLARKSON, SALEM POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND OFFICER VANMETER, Defendants. Tyrone Blocker 12620 SE Cora St. Portland, OR 97236 Pro se Plaintiff Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Civil Case No. 3:12-1523-KI OPINION AND ORDER KING, Judge: Plaintiff Tyrone Blocker asserts a Section 1983 cause of action for an alleged constitutional violation occurring during his trial on a criminal charge in Marion County Circuit Court. In his Complaint, Blocker alleges the State introduced Blocker s post-Miranda statements through an officer s testimony during its case-in-chief, thereby compelling Blocker to incriminate himself. He alleges, as a result, that he was illegally convicted and imprisoned and is now entitled to $32 million dollars. In Heck v. Humphrey, the Supreme Court concluded that, in order to recover damages for [an] allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been previously invalidated. Heck, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). A conviction can be invalidated by reversal on direct appeal, expungement by executive order, a state tribunal s declaration of invalidity, or by a federal court s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. This rule prevents a district court from entering a judgment in a civil action that would necessarily imply the invalidity of [a] conviction or sentence. Id. at 487. If I weighed in on Blocker s allegations, I would necessarily imply the invalidity of Blocker s conviction and run afoul of Heck. Where a plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the court must dismiss the case if the court determines that the action: (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER Accordingly, because Blocker fails to state a claim on which the court may grant relief, Blocker s complaint must be dismissed without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 29th day of August, 2012. /s/ Garr M. King Garr M. King United States District Judge Page 3 - OPINION AND ORDER

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.