 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Broussard v. Green8/16/2001
R>
No hearing was conducted prior to the trial court's dismissal of Broussard's suit. Without an evidentiary hearing a court may not dismiss a claim as having no arguable basis in fact. Hector v. Thaler, 862 S.W.2d 176, 178 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, no writ). Therefore, we must examine whether Broussard's claims have an arguable basis in law.
Broussard's original complaint and appellate brief allege he was harmed by Green's conduct because he was prevented from mounting a proper defense in the appeal of his parole revocation. Broussard's claim relies on the assumption that the revocation process was therefore somehow illegitimate, and denied him an opportunity to make a full showing. However, to recover money damages for "harms caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid," the United States Supreme Court requires a state prisoner to show first that his conviction or sentence was overturned on appeal, expunged by executive order or state tribunal, or called into question by a writ of habeas corpus. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 477-78, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 2372 (1994). The Heck analysis applies to parole proceedings as well. Littles v. Board of Pardons and Paroles Div., 68 F.3d 122, 123 (5th Cir. 1995); Jackson v. Vannoy, 49 F.3d 175, 177 (5th Cir. 1995). Therefore, a plaintiff who claims damages stemming from activity that allegedly hinders or illegitimizes a parole revocation process must first demonstrate that the parole revocation has been overturned, expunged, or called into question.
A monetary judgment for Broussard would necessarily imply that the revocation of his parole was invalid. This result requires a preliminary showing that his parole revocation has been overturned or questioned in some manner. Jackson, 49 F.3d at 177. Broussard has made no such showing. By Broussard's own admission, the Counsel's alleged failure to return his "legal papers" did not affect his initial parole revocation, at which he represented himself pro se.
This Court notes the fact that Broussard has also filed an application for writ of habeas corpus, currently pending in the 180th District Court of Harris County. In that action, he has challenged the propriety of his parole revocation process as well as the conduct of the hearing officer involved.
In the matter before this Court, Broussard did not show his parole revocation has been overturned, expunged, set aside, or questioned by the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. Therefore, this action cannot proceed.
Accordingly, we overrule appellant's sole point of error.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.
Page 1 2 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|