TURNER v. SULLIVAN (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Steven Deon Turner, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and conspiracy claims arising out of a disciplinary charge. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal as Heck-barred. Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Turner's action as barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), because Turner challenged the disciplinary charge and the resulting loss of good-time credits but he failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the disciplinary charge, including the loss of good-time credits, had been invalidated. See Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 78, 125 S.Ct. 1242, 161 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005) (“[A] prisoner in state custody cannot use a § 1983 action to challenge the fact or duration of his confinement,” but “must [instead] seek federal habeas corpus relief[.]” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 645, 117 S.Ct. 1584, 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997) (challenge to loss of good-time credits not cognizable under § 1983).

Turner's motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 5) is denied.

AFFIRMED.