Palmer v. United States Judicial Branch
Roy Lee PALMER v. UNITED STATES JUDICIAL BRANCH
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
JUDGMENT PER CURIAM.
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed June 7, 2002, be affirmed. The court correctly held that appellant may not pursue this damages action because his sentence has not been invalidated in a habeas or similar proceeding. See, e.g., Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 , 117 S.Ct. 1584 , 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997); Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994); Razzoli v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 230 F.3d 371 (D.C.Cir .2000).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.