Jerry Brewer v. Jonesboro Police Department, No. 15-3543 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Murphy, Bowman and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. District court's factual findings cannot be meaningfully reviewed in the absence of a trial transcript; no error in denying plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel; defendants' judgment affirmed without comment. [ June 01, 2016
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-3543 ___________________________ Jerry Todd Brewer lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Jonesboro Police Department; Craighead County Jail; Jeremy Wheelis, Police Officer, Jonesboro Police Department lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Jonesboro ____________ Submitted: May 27, 2016 Filed: June 2, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Jerry Todd Brewer appeals the district court’s1 adverse judgment entered after a bench trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We conclude that Brewer’s challenge to the district court’s findings of fact are not susceptible to meaningful review because he failed to provide a transcript of the trial proceedings. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b) (addressing appellant’s obligations with respect to transcript); Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., 827 F.2d 384, 386 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (where pro se appellant did not order trial transcript, appellate court could not review challenges to evidentiary rulings or to sufficiency of evidence). We further conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appointed counsel, see Phillips v. Jasper Cty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794-95 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review), or in denying Brewer’s post-trial motion, cf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(a)(2); Parton v. White, 203 F.3d 552, 556 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (standard of review); and that his request for a jury trial was untimely, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
