Robert G. Rasmussen v. State of California Department of Motor Vehicles;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
IL/Research
09-55075
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT G. RASMUSSEN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR
VEHICLES; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-55075
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01604-FMC-
PLA
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Florence-Marie Cooper, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2010**
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Robert G. Rasmussen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging his arrest for
FILED
MAR 31 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

IL/Research
09-55075 2
driving under the influence and the resultant suspension of his driver license in
administrative proceedings conducted by the California Department of Motor
Vehicles. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), Smithart v. Towery, 79 F.3d 951, 952 (9th
Cir. 1996) (per curiam), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Rasmussen’s complaint because his
claims are based on actions which, if deemed unlawful, would render his
conviction under California Vehicle Code section 23152 invalid, and that
conviction “has not been reversed, expunged or called into question by issuance of
a writ of habeas corpus.” Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994)
(holding that a plaintiff challenging action whose alleged unlawfulness would
implicate the validity of a conviction must prove that the conviction has been
invalidated); see also Smithart, 79 F.3d at 952 (affirming as Heck-barred district
court’s dismissal of § 1983 action alleging that police officers lacked probable
cause to arrest plaintiff for assault where plaintiff had pled guilty to assault).
Rasmussen’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --