Barrios, et al v. Johnny's Sport Shop, et al

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-20818
Conference Calendar
ALCARIO BARRIOS, JR.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOHNNY’S SPORT SHOP; MICHAEL L. GRIGAR; JEFF ARGO; R. H.
(CURLY) WIED,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-99-CV-2730
--------------------
June 14, 2001
Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alcario Barrios, Texas prisoner # 834396, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit under 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) for failure to state a claim. Barrios had
alleged that an employee of Johnny’s Sport Shop sold Barrios a
shotgun knowing that Barrios was on felony probation and that the
employee entrapped Barrios into a felon-in-possession-of-a-
firearm offense. On appeal, Barrios argues that the shop’s
employee conspired with a state actor to entrap Barrios and could

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-20818
-2-
thus be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that the district
court erred when it dismissed Barrios’s complaint prematurely
without allowing him to amend his complaint or file additional
pleadings, and, liberally construed, that he cannot have his
felon-in-possession conviction invalidated because the charge is
still pending.
We review the district court’s dismissal de novo. See Ruiz
v. United States, 160 F.3d 273, 275 (5th Cir. 1998). A dismissal
of a complaint for failure to state a claim is proper when,
taking the plaintiff’s allegations as true, it appears that no
relief could be granted on the plaintiff’s alleged facts. See
Bass v. Parkwood Hosp., 180 F.3d 234, 240 (5th Cir. 1999). The
district court correctly determined that Barrios could not seek
42 U.S.C. § 1983 relief for an allegedly illegal search and
detention on the felon-in-possession charge until that charge had
been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87
(1994); see also Randell v. Johnson, 227 F.3d 300,300-01 (5th
Cir. 2000), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Dec. 26, 2000)(No.
00-1054). The district court’s dismissal of Barrios’s complaint
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A was not premature and was not error.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --