Mark Hays v. Officer Shane Anderson
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Mark Alan Hays appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force and other violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We re view de novo, and may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Henderson v. City of Simi Valley, 305 F.3d 1052, 1055 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants Hanley and Huber on Hays’s § 1983 excessive force claim because a judgment in Hays’s favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his convictions for assaulting and obstructing a police officer, and Hays has not shown that his convictions have been invalidated. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994).
The district court properly dismissed the excessive force claim against defendants Anderson and Hagerty because Hays failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether these officers made contact with him. See Henderson, 305 F.3d at 1061 (affirming summary judgment where evidence in support of excessive force claim was “woefully sparse”).