Whether a wrongful state criminal conviction retains preclusive effect in a later federal action under 42-U.S.C-§1983 challenging the constitutionality of that state conviction when the federal suit is filed after the state conviction has been vacated

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court decided in Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 96-98 (1980), that an extant state criminal judgment retains preclusive effect in a later lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to the extent it would be afforded preclusive effect under state law. Conversely, Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487-87 (1994), holds that once a state criminal judgment has been vacated, a former prisoner may challenge the constitutionality of that now-defunct judgment using § 1983. See also McDonough v. Smith, 139 S. Ct. 2149, 2157-58 (2019). Consistent with this dichotomy and established preclusion principles, this Court and the federal courts of appeals have concluded that, as a matter of federal law, a vacated prior judgment does not retain preclusive effect in subsequent federal civil litigation. In this case, the Ninth Circuit diverged from this federal rule and held, contrary to Heck, that petitioner’s prior, vacated state conviction precluded his § 1983 claims challenging the constitutionality of his conviction, even though the § 1983 action was filed after petitioner’s state conviction had been set aside on grounds that he is actually innocent. The question presented is: Whether a wrongful state criminal conviction retains preclusive effect in a later federal action under 42 U.S.C. §1983 challenging the constitutionality of that state conviction when the federal suit is filed after the state conviction has been vacated. (1)