Bernard Williams v. Randy Davis, 609 F. App'x 865

Bernard Williams, an Illinois prisoner, was involved in a lunchroom altercation in which he admits he "hip checked" an officer to the ground three times; he was found guilty in a prison disciplinary hearing.
After telling prison internal-affairs officer Sean Furlow and Warden Randy Davis that he intended to sue the hearing officer for due-process violations, both allegedly threatened to refer him for criminal prosecution; Davis sent a letter to the state’s attorney.
About a year later Williams was charged in state court with aggravated battery and resisting a peace officer; he was ultimately convicted of resisting a peace officer but not aggravated battery.
Williams sued Furlow and Davis under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for malicious prosecution and retaliation (among other claims).
The district court dismissed the malicious-prosecution claim at screening under Heck v. Humphrey and dismissed the remaining retaliation/retaliatory-prosecution claim for failure to plead absence of probable cause, relying on Hartman and Williams’s own admission of the physical contact.
The district court also denied Williams’s motions to recruit counsel; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding the pleadings and attached state-court judgment foreclosed lack-of-probable-cause allegations and that the district court did not abuse its discretion regarding counsel recruitment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether malicious-prosecution claim should proceed despite unresolved state prosecution	Williams: state-court judgment shows aggravated battery dropped; malicious-prosecution viable	Defendants: Illinois law provides adequate remedies; Heck bars federal claim if state process unresolved	Affirmed dismissal under Heck and because state remedies adequate to address claim
Whether retaliatory-prosecution claim requires alleging absence of probable cause	Williams: not convicted of aggravated battery, so no probable cause	Defendants: plaintiff must plead absence of probable cause; his admission supports probable cause	Court: must allege and prove lack of probable cause; Williams’s admitted conduct and resisting conviction show probable cause; claim dismissed
Whether the district court erred in denying Rule 59(e)/motion to reinstate	Williams: attached state judgment undermines probable-cause finding	Defendants: judgment does not negate probable cause for charged offenses	Denial affirmed; postjudgment materials did not cure failure to allege lack of probable cause
Whether district court abused discretion by denying recruitment of counsel	Williams: complex claims and limited prison resources warranted appointment	Defendants: plaintiff did not show efforts to retain counsel or meet factors for appointment	Denial affirmed; court did not abuse discretion given lack of evidence he tried to hire counsel earlier

Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (federal claim that would imply invalidity of conviction barred until conviction reversed)
Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006) (retaliatory-prosecution plaintiff must plead and prove absence of probable cause)
Reichle v. Howards, 132 S. Ct. 2088 (2012) (reaffirming Hartman’s probable-cause requirement for retaliatory prosecution claims)
Chelios v. Heavener, 520 F.3d 678 (7th Cir. 2008) (probable cause to arrest for aggravated battery when plaintiff made contact with an officer)
Thayer v. Chiczewski, 705 F.3d 237 (7th Cir. 2012) (conviction for resisting can foreclose lack-of-probable-cause claim)
Avila v. Pappas, 591 F.3d 552 (7th Cir. 2010) (Illinois law may provide adequate remedies that foreclose federal malicious-prosecution claims)