Clinton Hitner v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Clinton Hitner leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Hitner sought a declaration that Pennsylvania’s kidnapping statute, 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2901, was unconstitutionally vague, but the court held that the challenge lacked supporting facts and was barred by the habeas and favorable-termination principles of Preiser and Heck because success would necessarily invalidate his outstanding conviction and sentence.

Holdings

1. A state prisoner may not use a § 1983 action to obtain a facial declaration that the criminal statute underlying his intact conviction is unconstitutional when success would necessarily invalidate the conviction and affect the fact or duration of confinement.
2. The Complaint failed to provide a factual basis for evaluating a non-First-Amendment vagueness challenge because it alleged no facts concerning the conduct underlying Hitner's conviction.
3. Leave to amend was properly denied because amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Hitner's facial vagueness challenge to the Pennsylvania kidnapping statute states a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when he remains incarcerated under a conviction obtained under that statute.
2. Whether the requested declaration is subject to habeas-channeling principles and Heck v. Humphrey's favorable-termination requirement because success would necessarily invalidate Hitner's conviction and sentence.
3. Whether the Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed