KING V. VILLEGAS, ET AL.
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Reversed
In this prisoner civil-rights appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that Federal Rule of Evidence 410(a) makes a prisoner’s earlier nolo contendere plea inadmissible in a subsequent § 1983 action, so the plea cannot be used to trigger the Heck v. Humphrey bar. Because the district court relied on the plea to dismiss Jerry Lee King’s excessive-force suit, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 410(a) bars use of a prior nolo contendere plea (and resulting conviction) to trigger the Heck v. Humphrey bar in subsequent § 1983 civil-rights actions.
Circuit Positions
Rule 410(a) bars admission of a nolo contendere plea or conviction to establish plaintiff's guilt; therefore the plea cannot be used to apply the Heck bar.
Rule 410(a) does not bar use of a nolo contendere plea when the former criminal defendant is the civil plaintiff; the plea may be used to invoke Heck and defeat the § 1983 claim.
Conflict Summary
The Ninth and First Circuits hold that Rule 410(a) categorically forbids admission of a nolo contendere plea or the resulting conviction to prove the plaintiff actually committed the underlying offense for Heck purposes, allowing the § 1983 action to proceed. The Sixth Circuit, by contrast, treats Rule 410(a) as inapplicable when the former criminal defendant is the plaintiff in the civil case, permitting defendants to rely on the plea/conviction to invoke Heck and bar the suit.