Stines v. Convertino

Full title: JOSEPH STINES, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD G. CONVERTINO, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: May 11, 2006

Case Number: 06-CV-11855 (E.D. Mich. May. 11, 2006)

Opinion

Case Number: 06-CV-11855.

May 11, 2006

ORDER OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PAUL BORMAN, District Judge

Plaintiff Joseph Stines has filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the Federal Detention Center in Milan, Michigan. He is proceeding without prepayment of the filing fee in this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). After careful consideration, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff is incarcerated pursuant to a conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and § 846. United States v. Stines, No. 98-80812 (E.D. Mich.). Plaintiff claims that the defendant, former Assistant United States Attorney Richard Convertino, coerced at least one prosecution witness to give false testimony at Plaintiff's trial. Because Plaintiff's complaint challenges the conduct of a federal prosecutor, his claim is properly filed under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1981), rather than 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

A judgment in favor of Plaintiff on the claims contained in his complaint would necessarily imply the invalidity of his continued confinement. In Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994), the Supreme Court held such claims to be improper under 42 U.S.C. § 1983:

[W]hen a state prisoner seeks damages in a § 1983 suit, the district court must consider whether a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence; if it would, the complaint must be dismissed unless plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated.

Id. at 486-87. The Supreme Court's holding in Heck applies with equal force to a civil rights action brought pursuant to Bivens Baranski v. Fifteen Unknown Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, 401 F.3d 419, 434 (6^th Cir. 2005).

Currently pending in this Court is Plaintiff's motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, in which he challenges his conviction based upon defendant Convertino's conduct. Plaintiff's instant claims under Bivens may not be sustained unless he can demonstrate that his conviction has been invalidated. Therefore, the Court shall dismiss the complaint without prejudice to Plaintiff's right to seek relief under Bivens upon resolution of his § 2255 motion.

According, IT IS ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.