Heck v. Humphrey
- Decided
- June 24, 1994
- Docket
- 93-6188
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 15,294 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that a plaintiff, in order to recover damages for an unconstitutional conviction, must show a favorable termination of the underlying conviction — Haley v. City of Boston (2011)
- holding that allegation of knowing destruction of exculpatory evidence necessarily implied invalidity of conviction and sentence — Hamilton v. Lyons (1996)
- holding that a plaintiff, in order to recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction, must show a favorable termination of the underlying conviction — Limone v. Condon (2004)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case presents the question whether a state prisoner may challenge the constitutionality of his conviction in a suit for damages under 42 U. S. C. § 1983.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)Read the full opinion
Free account needed
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.