Whipple v. Leatham, 3:21-cv-00002

Plaintiff Robert Z. Whipple, III, a former federal and current state inmate, filed suit pro se against several federal and state law enforcement officers and an unknown Assistant U.S. Attorney.
Claims stem from a warrantless entry into Whipple's hotel room and a subsequent search of his car on March 7, 2020, which led to his bank robbery conviction.
Whipple filed for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens, alleging violations of his civil rights through unlawful searches and seizures.
Magistrate Judge Poplin screened the complaint as required for cases by prisoners seeking to proceed in forma pauperis.
The Sixth Circuit previously rejected Whipple's challenge to the seizure of his vehicle and upheld his conviction; Whipple has not contested the current recommendation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Official Capacity Claims	Officers acted under official capacity	Bivens claims not allowed vs. federal officers in official capacity	Dismissed; Bivens claims in official capacity not permitted
Damages Related to Conviction	Entitled to damages for conviction	Conviction not overturned; Heck bars claims	Dismissed, per Heck v. Humphrey
Damages for Seizure of Vehicle	Vehicle was unlawfully seized	Seizure upheld by Sixth Circuit	Dismissed; Sixth Circuit found no 4th Am. violation
Damages for Seizure of Cellphone/Cash	Entitled to compensation	Not argued separately	Survives; claim allowed as property issue

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (Bivens claims limited to individual capacity federal officers)
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (§ 1983 claims cannot challenge convictions not overturned)
Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159 (official-capacity suits equal suits against the entity)
Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability under § 1983 requires custom or policy)