Liesmann vs. Owens, (5th Cir. 2004)
Linked as:
Text
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50103 Summary Calendar ELMO HAROLD LIESMANN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus BOB OWENS, Director; TAMMY McINOCH, Parole Officer, Dallas County, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-95-CV-396 July 9, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Elmo Harold Liesmann, Texas prisone r #390085, appeals the dismissal of his civil rights suit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).
Liesmann contends that the requirements of Heck v. Humphrey , 114 S.Ct. 2364 (1994), do not apply to his claims against the defendants. We do not agree. S ee Jackson v. Vannoy , 49 F.3d 175, 177 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 116 S.Ct. 148 (1995). We have reviewed the record and LiesmannÂ’s brief and AFFIRM the district courtÂ’s dismissal for essentially the same reasons adopted by the district court. L iesmann v. Owens , No. A-95-CV-396 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 1996).
A F F I R M E D.
Sponsored links
This document cites
- US Code - Title 28: Judiciary and Judicial Procedure - 28 USC 1915 - Sec. 1915. Proceedings in forma pauperis
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Tommy Lee Jackson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thomas Vannoy, Chief of Police, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-50348. Summary Calendar., 49 F.3d 175 (5th Cir. 1995)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
