Murray v. United States Of America
ORDER denying 29 Motion copies. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 5/18/17. (cmr)
ANTONIO LAMONT MURRAY,
(Formerly CR 612-0 05)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
set aside or correct sentence under 28 U.S.C.
on December 29,
Petitioner thoroughly and adequately
represented himself in the district court, filing a memorandum
in support of his petition and a reply brief.
On November 12,
the United States Magistrate Judge issued a
Report and Recommendation to deny his petition on the merits.
Over Petitioner's objections,
this Court adopted the Report
and Recommendation on January 19, 2016, and closed the case.
Appealability with the Eleventh Circuit.
adequately represented himself as evidenced by his coherent
motion for a Certificate of Appealability, which resulted in
a fifteen-page opinion by the Honorable Beverly B. Martin
denying the motion on the merits.
Circuit has granted Petitioner a sixty-day extension within
which to file a motion for reconsideration of Judge Martin's
Presently before this Court is Petitioner's request for
brief (46 pages (140 pages including exhibits)).
explains that he
lost these documents
in transport between
The Court is not unsympathetic to the problems facing a
Nevertheless, an indigent litigant is not
entitled to free copies of documents unless they are necessary
to decide an issue presented by suit or appeal.
See 28 U.S.C.
§ 753(f)1 (A defendant may receive a free transcript only if
the court "certifies that the suit or appeal is not frivolous
presented by the suit or appeal.");
Wainwricrht, 794 F.2d 1516,
see also Jefferies v.
transcripts - is not expressly governed by § 753(f),
standard set forth in § 753(f) may be applied.
under 28 U.S.C. § 2250, the Court may direct the Clerk to
provide copies of documents or parts of the record at Court
expense, but a petitioner must demonstrate a particularized
need in relation to his habeas claims.
See Convington v.
United States, 2012 WL 3835085, at: *i (M.D. Fla. Sept. 4,
a free transcript to an indigent defendant is unconstitutional
only where the transcript is valuable to the defense and no
functional alternatives exist."); United States v. Mitchell,
2008 WL 824226,
to receive a copy of
. . . documents free of charge
Here, Petitioner has already demonstrated his
ability to adequately convey his habeas claims to this Court
Eleventh Circuit has
2255 motion and the Government's
response in its case file.
acceptable practices of this Court in providing free copies of
documents, particularly where the documents are lengthy and
Defendant may always make arrangements with the
Accordingly, Defendant's request (doc. 272) is DENIED,
ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this
/ Cr^ day of
J. R^DM^HAKL, CHIEF JUDGE
uniteVtbi?ates DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?