Harry W. Roberts v. B. Wilson
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Non-Argument Calendar.
1Per curiam
Harry W. Roberts, pro se, appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 civil rights action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(B)(2)(ii). Roberts argues that the district court erroneously concluded that Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), and Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 117 S.Ct. 1584, 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997) rendered his action incognizable under § 1983. 1
We review § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) dismissals for failure to state a claim de novo, using the same standards that govern Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissals and viewing the allegations in the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Wilkinson v. DotsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- CHANNELL v. FOLSOMDistrict Court, N.D. Florida · 2024
- Diaz v. InchDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2021
- Stuckey v. LemmaDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2019