# Brown v. Saunders

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 10, 1997 · 108 F.3d 1371

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/737601

## Case

- **Full name:** James Arthur Brown v. Lonnie M. Saunders, Warden, Augusta Correctional Center John B. Metzger, Iii, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board Ronald Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections Laurel A. Corner, Manager, Central Criminal and Legal Records V v. Grant, Augusta Grievance Coordinator Mrs. Byram, Secretary/awp, Augusta Correctional Center, and Lydia Calvert Taylor, Judge, Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk Thomas H. Wood, Judge, Augusta County Circuit Court R.M. Spencer, Judge, Norfolk General District Court Kent P. Porter, Assistant Commonwealth Attorney, Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk James N. Garrett, Jr., Defense Counsel, Portsmouth Junius P. Fulton, Iii, Appellate Counsel, Norfolk, Virginia Marion R. Crank, Detective, Youth Division S/c Unit of Norfolk
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 10, 1997
- **Citations:** 108 F.3d 1371; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 10682; 1997 WL 103721
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/737601

## Opinion text

108 F.3d 1371
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
James Arthur BROWN, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Lonnie M. SAUNDERS, Warden, Augusta Correctional Center;
John B. Metzger, III, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board;
Ronald Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections; Laurel A. Corner, Manager, Central Criminal
and Legal Records; V.V. GRANT, Augusta Grievance
Coordinator; MRS. BYRAM, Secretary/AWP, Augusta
Correctional Center, Defendants--Appellees,
and
Lydia Calvert TAYLOR, Judge, Circuit Court for the City of
Norfolk; THOMAS H. WOOD, Judge, Augusta County Circuit
Court; R.M. Spencer, Judge, Norfolk General District Court;
Kent P. Porter, Assistant Commonwealth Attorney, Circuit
Court for the City of Norfolk; James N. Garrett, Jr.,
Defense Counsel, Portsmouth; Junius P. Fulton, III,
Appellate Counsel, Norfolk, Virginia; Marion R. Crank,
Detective, Youth Division S/C Unit of Norfolk, Defendants.
No. 96-6740.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 27, 1997.
Decided March 10, 1997.
James Arthur Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Appellant filed an action seeking damages, challenging his ineligibility for parole under Virginia law. To recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or sentence, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a prisoner must prove that the conviction or sentence was: (1) reversed on direct appeal; (2) expunged by executive order; (3) declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such a determination; or (4) called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. See Heck v. Humphrey, --- U.S. ----, 62 U.S.L.W. 4594 , 4597 (U.S. June 24, 1994) (No. 93-6188). Because Appellant has failed to make such a showing, his claim is not ripe and must be dismissed without prejudice. Accordingly, we affirm as modified to reflect dismissal without prejudice to Appellant's right to file another action if his claim becomes ripe. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
2
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/737601. Public record. Not legal advice.