Opinion
Cr. No. 01-828-HMH.
November 21, 2005
OPINION ORDER
This matter is before the court on Brian Wright's ("Wright") pro se "motion for court reporter's verbatim sentencing transcript's at governments expense." (Mot. for Sentencing Tr. 1.) This court construes pro se motions liberally and such pro se motions are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys. See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). However, even if the court applies this less stringent standard, Wright's request for a sentencing transcript at the government's expense cannot be granted. A prisoner who requests free copies of records in his or her criminal case, whether it is a state case or a federal case, must show a particularized need for such records. Jones v. Superintendent, Virginia State Farm, 460 F.2d 150, 152-153 (4th Cir. 1972), reh'g granted, 465 F.2d 1091, 1094 (4th Cir. 1972) (adhering to prior opinion and denying rehearing en banc); Morin v. United States, 522 F.2d 8, 9 (4th Cir. 1975) (applying Jones to federal prisoner). Wright has not shown a particularized need for the sentencing transcript. Accordingly, Wright's motion for a copy of his sentencing transcript at the government's expense is denied.
It is therefore
ORDERED that Wright's "motion for court reporter's verbatim sentencing transcript's at governments expense" is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.