Heck v. Humphrey

Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), was a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court held that "in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a §1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus".^[1]

Heck v. Humphrey
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 19, 1994 Decided June 24, 1994
Full case name	Roy Heck v. James Humphrey et al.
Citations	512 U.S. 477 (more) 114 S. Ct. 2364; 129 L. Ed. 2d 383; 1972
Holding
A defendant cannot claim damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment without showing that the conviction or sentence has been overturned in some way. The defendant must also exhaust state court remedies before bringing a §1983 action.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices Harry Blackmun · John P. Stevens Sandra Day O'Connor · Antonin Scalia Anthony Kennedy · David Souter Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Case opinions
Majority	Scalia, joined by Rehnquist,Kennedy,Thomas,Ginsburg
Concurrence	Thomas
Concurrence	Souter, joined by Blackmun,Stevens,O'Connor

References

1. "Heck v. Humphrey: What Should State Prisoners Use When Seeking Damages From State Officials, Section 1983 or Federal Habeas Corpus? | Office of Justice Programs". www.ojp.gov. Retrieved September 8, 2023.

External links

• Opinion at Cornell LII