Narrative Opinion Summary
The appeal was reviewed based on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the appellant's brief. The court affirmed the district court’s order from January 6, 2010. It concluded that there is no private right of action under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242, referencing the case Pope v. Thornburgh. Additionally, the appellant could not recover damages related to his criminal conviction and confinement because he had not demonstrated that his conviction was invalidated, citing Heck v. Humphrey. The ruling will not be published as per D.C. Circuit Rule 36. The Clerk is instructed to delay the issuance of the mandate for seven days following the resolution of any timely petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc.
Legal Issues Addressed
Damages Related to Criminal Conviction and Confinementsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's claim for damages was denied because he failed to show that his criminal conviction had been invalidated.
Reasoning: The appellant could not recover damages related to his criminal conviction and confinement because he had not demonstrated that his conviction was invalidated, citing Heck v. Humphrey.
Issuance of Mandate Post-Petitionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court instructed the Clerk to withhold the issuance of the mandate for a specified period to allow for any petitions for rehearing.
Reasoning: The Clerk is instructed to delay the issuance of the mandate for seven days following the resolution of any timely petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc.
No Private Right of Action under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that individuals cannot initiate a private lawsuit based on violations of federal criminal statutes 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242.
Reasoning: It concluded that there is no private right of action under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242, referencing the case Pope v. Thornburgh.
Publication of Judicial Opinionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision in this case will not be formally published, following the rules of the D.C. Circuit.
Reasoning: The ruling will not be published as per D.C. Circuit Rule 36.