Frank B. Cockrell, Ii v. Michael Bradbury;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANK B. COCKRELL, II,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL BRADBURY; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 08-55163
D.C. No. CV-07-06971-CAS
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Frank B. Cockrell, II, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred by Heck v.
FILED
DEC 08 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-55163 2
Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Huftile
v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action alleging that the defendants
engaged in a conspiracy leading to Cockrell’s criminal convictions because
judgment in Cockrell’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of those
convictions, and Cockrell has failed to demonstrate that his convictions have been
invalidated. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487.
Cockrell’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --