U.S.
v.
Toomer

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando DivisionJul 3, 2010
CASE NO. 6:06-cr-125-Orl-19KRS. (M.D. Fla. Jul. 3, 2010)

CASE NO. 6:06-cr-125-Orl-19KRS.

July 3, 2010


ORDER


This case is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Obtain Transcripts (Doc. No. 1808, filed June 25, 2010). Upon consideration, the motion is DENIED.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2250, the Government is authorized to provide, without charge, portions of the record to a defendant seeking relief under § 2255. However, since Defendant has not yet filed a section 2255 motion, he is not entitled to these documents free of charge. See United States v. Warmus, 151 F. App'x 783, at *3 (11th Cir. 2005) (a prisoner who has not filed a section 2255 motion is "not entitled to obtain copies of court records at the government's expense to search for possible defects merely because he is an indigent.") (quotation omitted) (citations omitted). Moreover, Defendant must show need and relevance, see Hayman v. Vaughan, 1990 WL 204244 (E.D. Pa. December 7, 1990), and his bald allegations are insufficient to show entitlement under section 2250.

Congress has also authorized the Government to pay transcript fees for those prisoners bringing cases under § 2255 "if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the suit or appeal is not frivolous and that the transcript is needed to decide the issue presented by the suit or appeal." 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). Here, as already noted, Defendant does not have a section 2255 motion pending with the Court. In addition, Defendant's "[c]onclusory allegations [of the need for the documents] . . ., without more, do not satisfy the requirements of § 753(f)." See Sistrunk v. United States, 992 F.2d 258, 259 (10th Cir. 1993).

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Orlando, Florida.