458 F. App'x 334
5th Cir.2012Background
- Villegas, paroled in 2001 after a Texas drug conviction, was staying at a residence when federal agents found firearms on April 29, 2003.
- He was indicted on two federal firearms charges and convicted by a jury in 2005, receiving consecutive sentences of 120 and 90 months.
- Texas revoked Villegas's parole in April 2006, a matter affirmed on appeal in 2007.
- In August 2010 Villegas filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, 1986, and 1988, plus assault, false imprisonment, and RICO claims.
- The district court dismissed the complaint; Villegas appeals asserting time-bar, Heck v. Humphrey, and failure to state a claim.
- The Fifth Circuit affirms, holding absolute immunity applies to certain defendants, Heck bars other claims, and accrual and abandonment issues foreclose remaining claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Judge Rosenthal and prosecutors absolutely immune? | Villegas seeks liability for actions taken in trial and prosecutions. | Absolute immunity shields judges and prosecutors from such suits. | Yes; claims barred by absolute immunity. |
| Are parole hearing officers immune for actions in parole revocation? | Parole decisions were improper, raising civil liability. | Parole officials are absolutely immune from suit for their official functions. | Yes; claims barred by absolute immunity. |
| Do Heck v. Humphrey barriers bar Villegas's claims? | Some claims challenge trial/parole proceedings independent of conviction. | Because his federal conviction and parole revocation have not been invalidated, Heck bars these claims. | Yes; Heck bars claims challenging validity of conviction or revocation. |
| Are the unlawful search/seizure claims time-barred? | Search and arrest claims may be ongoing or continuing. | Civil rights claims accrue when injury is known and are time-barred since 2003. | Yes; accrual occurred in 2003 and claims are time-barred. |
| Did Villegas abandon other claims (assault, false imprisonment, discriminatory claims)? | Lingering issues remain unresolved and should be considered. | Villegas abandoned these issues in briefing; they fail on the merits or lack state-law bases. | Yes; claims abandoned and fail. |
Key Cases Cited
- Van de Kamp v. Goldstein, 555 U.S. 335 (2009) (absolute prosecutorial immunity as threshold matter)
- Davis v. Tarrant County, 565 F.3d 214 (5th Cir. 2009) (absolute judicial immunity threshold)
- Boyd v. Biggers, 31 F.3d 279 (5th Cir. 1994) (absolute immunity doctrine context)
- Hulsey v. Owens, 63 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 1995) (absolute immunity as threshold matter)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (civil actions barred when conviction is not reversed)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (false imprisonment accrual ends with legal process)
- Hitt v. Connell, 301 F.3d 240 (5th Cir. 2002) (accrual for false imprisonment under federal law)
- Stephenson v. Reno, 28 F.3d 26 (5th Cir. 1994) (proceedings when claim relates to conviction)
- Mackey v. Dickson, 47 F.3d 744 (5th Cir. 1995) (unlawful arrest and accrual considerations)
- McGrew v. Texas Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 47 F.3d 158 (5th Cir. 1995) (parole revocation proceedings and due process)