Walker

Walker v. Police Chief

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 12, 20191:19-cv-01546California8,351 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

17 Plaintiff, Harold Walker, is a prisoner in the custody of Fresno County Jail. On October 31, 2019, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil complaint against eight officers of the Fresno Police Department and three employees of Grocery Outlet. (Doc. 1 (“Compl.”).) Plaintiff purports to allege causes of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) for “making false statement[s] to police,” false arrest, “false prosecution,” excessive force, and municipal liability in violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and rights under the California Constitution. (Id. at 5–7.) Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages in the amount of $98,000,000. (Id. at 8.) Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, which was granted on November 5, 2019. (Docs. 2 & 3.) Plaintiff’s complaint is now before the Court for screening. The Court finds Plaintiff may be able to state some cognizable claims. However, as discussed more fully below, the Court cannot determine whether his claims are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Thus, Plaintiff is provided the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.