Aaron Holsey appeals the jury verdict against him in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action alleging that Defendant Ross failed to take reasonable steps to protect Holsey from assaults by other inmates. Finding no error, we affirm.

Holsey challenges the jury's verdict on the following grounds: (1) the jurors were prejudiced because they knew he had participated in a similar trial the preceding day; (2) the judge told the jurors that there had been no destruction of institutional log books; (3) the court dictated the order of witnesses so that Defendant heard the testimony of most other witnesses before he testified; (4) the court erred when it permitted the introduction of photographs of cell doors because the photographs reflected the doors after they had been improved upon; (5) the court failed to provide Holsey discovery of all documents that he wished to submit at trial, while the defense was allowed to present "surprise" documents at trial; (6) prior to the presentation of evidence, the defense moved for a directed verdict; (7) the marshals lied about serving two witnesses with subpoenas; and (8) for approximately one week prior to trial, Holsey was denied papers essential to the preparation of his case. Having carefully reviewed the record and other materials, we find that these contentions do not warrant relief and that the case does not present a substantial question warranting the preparation of a transcript at government expense.* See 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1988).

As our review of the materials before us reveals that it would not significantly aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument. The motions for preparation of a transcript at government expense and for appointment of counsel are denied.