Colvin McCright v. Arnold Schwarzenegger;

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
COLVIN MCCRIGHT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 08-16994
D.C. No. 5:08-CV-00804-JW
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
James Ware, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Colvin McCright, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
FILED
APR 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-16994 2
§ 1915A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo,
Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because a judgment in
McCright’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his sentence, and his
sentence has not been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87
(1994). McCright’s reliance on Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74 (2005), is
unpersuasive.
McCright’s motion for default judgment is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --