Opinion

Brown v. Quian

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Aug 18, 2023
Status
Unpublished
Nature of suit
Prisoner w/ out Counsel
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 5.5%

The opinion

Case: 23-20083 Document: 00516862919 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2023

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

____________

FILED

August 18, 2023

No. 23-20083

Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce

____________ Clerk

Avivia Luciana Brown,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

S. H. Quian, Officer; P. T. Rubio, Officer,

Defendants—Appellants.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:20-CV-862

______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The defendants in this interlocutory appeal challenge the district

court’s denial, in part, of their motion to dismiss Avivia Luciana Brown’s

42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. In support of their appeal, the defendants

contend that, contrary to the district court’s ruling, Brown did not allege

facts showing that they violated her constitutional rights, they were entitled

_____________________

*

This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 23-20083 Document: 00516862919 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2023

No. 23-20083

to qualified immunity, and Brown’s claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey,

512 U.S. 477 (1994). We have jurisdiction to review these arguments. See

Poole v. City of Shreveport, 13 F.4th 420, 426 (5th Cir. 2021); Armstrong v.

Ashley, 918 F.3d 419, 422 (5th Cir. 2019).

Accepting Brown’s allegations as true and in a light most favorable to

her, see Ramirez v. Guadarrama, 3 F.4th 129, 133 (5th Cir. 2021), the district

court did not err in determining that Brown had stated a claim for relief under

the Fourth Amendment and that the defendants’ alleged actions were

objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law, see Ramirez v.

Martinez, 716 F.3d 369, 379 (5th Cir. 2013); Newman v. Guedry, 703 F.3d 757,

763-64 (5th Cir. 2012); Spann v. Rainey, 987 F.2d 1110, 1112, 1115 (5th Cir.

1993). Last, the district court correctly determined that Heck has no bearing,

given the finding that the prosecutor dismissed the criminal charge against

Brown before trial, and the prosecution against Brown in state court ended

without a conviction. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87.

Accordingly, the district court’s ruling is AFFIRMED.

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.