Whether Heck v. Humphrey bars a § 1983 claim when criminal charges were dismissed through a pretrial diversion program

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court held in Heck v. Humphrey that a plaintiff cannot bring a § 1983 claim based on “actions whose unlawfulness would render a [prior] conviction or sentence invalid” unless he can “prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed” or otherwise invalidated. 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). A contrary rule, the Court explained, “would permit a collateral attack on the conviction through the vehicle of a civil suit.” Id. at 484 (citations omitted). The question presented, on which six courts of appeals are expressly and evenly divided, is whether Heck may properly be extended to bar the claims of a plaintiff who was never convicted or sentenced at all because his criminal charges were dismissed through a pretrial diversion program.