Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Bryan Cowan, et al. v. Masa Nathaniel Warden
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 20-17405 · judgment April 4, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
The questions presented are:
-
Plaintiff pled no contest to California Penal Code §69 prior to bringing this §1983 action against all three officers who were involved in his arrest. Many federal circuits1 have adopted a rule which bars a claim under Heck if it is based on specific factual allegations that are inconsistent with the facts upon which his criminal conviction was based. Is a claim cognizable under Heck when Plaintiff would be required to disprove any part of the unqualified factual basis for his conviction in order to succeed in the tort action?
-
Under Heck, can a §1983 action for excessive force be barred against officers who were not named in the criminal charge upon which Plaintiff was convicted,
-
Thore v. Howe, 466 F.3d 173, 179-80 (1st Cir. 2006); O’Brien v. Town of Bellingham, 943 F.3d 514, 529 (1st Cir. 2019); Jacobs v. Bayha, 616 F. App’x 507, 513-14 (3rd Cir. 2015); Bush v. Strain, 513 F. 3d 492, 498 n. 14 (5th Cir. 2008); Okoro v. Callaghan, 324 F.3d 488, 490 (7th Cir. 2003); McCann v. Neilsen, 466 F.3d 619, 621-22 (7th Cir. 2006); Gilbert v. Cook, 512 F.3d 899, 902 (7th Cir. 2008); Beets v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 669 F.3d 1038, 046 (9th Cir. 2012); Sanders v. City of Pittsburg, 14 F.4th 968, 970-71 (9th Cir. 2021); Galindo v. City of Orange, 678 F. App’x 559, 560 (9th Cir. 2017); Harrigan v. Metro Dade Police Dep’t Station #4, 977 F.3d 1185, 1196 (11th Cir. 2020); Ducksworth v. Rook, 647 F. App’x 383, 385- 86 (5th Cir. 2016) (citing Daigre v. City of Waveland, Miss., 549 F. App’x 283, 286 (5th Cir. 2013), citing DeLeon v. City of Corpus Christi, 488 F.3d 649, 656-57 (5th Cir. 2007)); Dodds v. City of Yorktown, 656 Fed. App’x 40, 43 (5th Cir. 2016).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Patrick Leslie Deedon
Maire & Deedon
For respondent
Brian Curtis McComas
Law Office of B.C. McComas
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 17 2022Petition DENIED.
- Sep 28 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/14/2022.
- Sep 21 2022Waiver of right of respondent Masa Nathaniel Warden to respond filed.
- Aug 25 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 28, 2022)