Sabil M. Mujahid, A/k/a Terry Smith, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Jeffery Tom, Chairman Halawa High Security Facility; Henrymata, Lt., Chairperson Halawa High Securityfacility, Tera Harper, Chairpersonhalawa High Security Facility,defendants-appellees, 56 F.3d 72 (9th Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 56 F.3d 72 (9th Cir. 1995) Submitted May 2, 1995. *Decided May 5, 1995

Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Hawaii state prisoner Sabil M. Mujahid appeals pro se the district court's judgment following a bench trial in favor of members of the prison disciplinary committee in Mujahid's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his due process rights were violated when he was disciplined for threatening to use force, making sexual threats and using abusive language to a correction officer. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we dismiss the appeal for Mujahid's failure to comply with Fed. R. App. P. 10(b) (2).

On appeal, Mujahid challenges several of the district court's factual findings, evidentiary rulings, and conclusions of law. Mujahid failed, however, to supply this court with the trial transcript or request a copy from the district court.

"If the appellant intends to urge on appeal that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, the appellant shall include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such a finding or conclusion." Fed. R. App. P. 10(b) (2). "Based on this rule, we have held that failure to provide relevant portions of a transcript may require dismissal of the appeal." Syncom Capital Corp. v. Wade, 924 F.2d 167, 169 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam); accord, Southwest Admin'rs, Inc. v. Lopez, 781 F.2d 1378, 1378-80 (9th Cir. 1986); Thomas v. Computax Corp., 631 F.2d 139, 141 (9th Cir. 1980). Without a transcript of the trial proceedings, we cannot review Mujahid's claims of error. Accordingly, we dismiss Mujahid's appeal. See Wade, 924 F.2d at 169.

DISMISSED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

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.