Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

USA v. Kimbrell, CR107-034. (2017)

Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia Number: infdco20171226555 Visitors: 10
Filed: Dec. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 22, 2017
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR. , District Judge . Before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Sentencing Transcripts at No Cost. (Doc. 19.) In 2007, Defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute a listed chemical pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 846, 841(f)(1) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 922(g). (Doc. 1.) On May 24, 2007, this Court accepted Defendant's guilty plea to both counts (Doc. 4) and eventually sentenced Defendant to 168 months of imprisonmen
More

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Sentencing Transcripts at No Cost. (Doc. 19.) In 2007, Defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute a listed chemical pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(f)(1) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). (Doc. 1.) On May 24, 2007, this Court accepted Defendant's guilty plea to both counts (Doc. 4) and eventually sentenced Defendant to 168 months of imprisonment to be followed by 3 years of supervised relief (Doc. 5). Now, Defendant has been released from prison and is requesting that this Court provide him with his sentencing transcript at no cost. While Defendant contends that he needs the transcript at no cost because he is homeless, he provides no information as to why he needs his sentencing transcript.

Typically, this Court addresses the issue of transcripts at no cost in response to similar requests by prisoners hoping to challenge their convictions with a habeas petition. In that context, the Court has held that a federal prisoner is not entitled to obtain copies of court records at Government expense for the purpose of searching the record for possible error. See Walker v. United States, 424 F.2d 278, 278 (5th Cir. 1970).1 Although Defendant is not currently imprisoned, the logic is still the same. The Court will not just provide transcripts at the Court's own cost simply to allow Defendant to review his sentencing for possible error. As a result, Defendant's motion is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2f 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to October 1, 1981.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer