Missouri inmate Larry D. Bittick appeals from the order of the District Court 1 dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Bittick challenged a Missouri state-court judgment that ordered reimbursement for the cost of his care and custody pursuant to the Missouri Incarceration Reimbursement Act (MIRA). He also sought release and return of funds seized from his inmate account pursuant to the MIRA. We have carefully reviewed the record de novo, see Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam), and we conclude that Bittick’s § 1983 action is barred by the Rooker-Feldman 2 doctrine, see Skit Int’l, Ltd., v. DAC Techs. of Ark, Inc., 487 F.3d 1154, 1156 (8th Cir. 2007) (“The Rooker-Feldman doctrine prohibits lower federal courts from exercising appellate review of state court judgments.”), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 991, 128 S.Ct. 495, 169 L.Ed.2d 340 (2007). Accordingly, we affirm.