Levi Springer v. Officer Deel

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:10-cv-00256-JPJ-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998869240]. Mailed to: Levi Springer. [11-7506]

Appeal: 11-7506

Doc: 12

Filed: 06/06/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7506

LEVI SPRINGER,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
OFFICER M. DEEL; SGT. COLLINS; OFFICER BRIAN HURLEY,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
SGT. SMITH; WARDEN TRACY RAY; SGT. ADAMS; OFFICER PHILLIPS;
OFFICER TALOR; SHERRY SHORTRIDGE; CAPTAIN MCCOY,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
James P. Jones, District
Judge. (7:10-cv-00256-JPJ-RSB)

Submitted:

May 31, 2012

Decided:

June 6, 2012

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Levi Springer, Appellant Pro Se.
Mark R. Davis, Assistant
Attorney General, Lara Kate Jacobs, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Appeal: 11-7506

Doc: 12

Filed: 06/06/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 11-7506

Doc: 12

Filed: 06/06/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Levi Springer appeals the jury’s verdict in favor of
the Appellees in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action.
does

not

contain

a

transcript

of

the

jury

The record

proceedings.

An

appellant has the burden of including in the record on appeal a
transcript

of

all

parts

issues raised on appeal.
10(c).

of

the

proceedings

material

to

the

See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R.

Springer has neither provided a transcript of the trial

nor moved for a transcript at government expense.
§ 753(f) (2006).
qualify

for

See 28 U.S.C.

By failing to produce a transcript or to

the

production

of

a

transcript

at

government

expense, Springer has waived review of the issues on appeal that
depend on the transcript to show error.
F.2d

22,

26

(5th

Cir.

1992)

(per

Powell v. Estelle, 959

curiam);

Keller

v.

Prince

George’s Cnty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987).

As no

error appears on the record before us, we affirm the district
court’s judgment.
facts

and

materials

legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions

are

adequately

the

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3