Helman v. Duhaime

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-police officials’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action, alleging that defendants violated plaintiff's 4th Amendment rights by using excessive force by shooting him when attempting to execute arrest warrant issued for him. Record showed that defendant had pleaded guilty to Indiana charge of resisting law enforcement officer that stemmed from instant shooting incident, and under Heck, 512 US 477, defendant was precluded from bringing instant 1983 action under theory that he did not attempt to draw his weapon until after shots were fired at him, since said theory was inconsistent with his guilty plea to resisting arrest charge and otherwise implied invalidity of his state court conviction.