Charles Alexander/Ryahim v. Daryl Gardner, et al, No. 07-2489 (8th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. Defendants' judgment affirmed without comment; in the absence of a transcript, the court could not review appellant's challenges to evidentiary rulings.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 07-2489 ___________ Charles Alexander/Ryahim, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Arkansas. Daryl Gardner, Sgt., Varner Super * Max, ADC; Corcolis, CO-1, Varner * [UNPUBLISHED] Super Max, ADC; Floyd Williams, * CO-1, Varner Super Max, ADC; * Michelle Rucker, CO-1, Varner * Super Max, ADC; Ransom Evans, * Lt., Varner Super Max, ADC; Tim * Moncrief, Assistant Warden, Varner * Super Max, ADC; Patricia Kelly, * Dr., Varner Super Max, ADC * (originally sued as Kelly); Tanyon * Norman, Nurse, Varner Super Max, * ADC (originally sued as Norman); * Jerry King, Nurse, Varner Super Max, * ADC (originally sued as King), * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: October 23, 2008 Filed: October 27, 2008 ___________ Before MELLOY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Charles Alexander/Ryahim appeals the district court s1 adverse judgment entered upon a jury verdict in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. On appeal, Ryahim unsuccessfully requested preparation of a transcript at government expense, and he has provided no justification for reconsideration of that decision. We therefore cannot review most of the evidentiary matters about which Ryahim complains involving such things as admission or exclusion of evidence, judicial bias, or the jury s verdict, see Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(1) (discussing appellant s duty to order transcript); Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners, 827 F.2d 384, 385-86 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (where pro se appellant did not order trial transcript, this court could not review claims of judicial bias, evidentiary rulings, or sufficiency of evidence), and we find Ryahim s remaining arguments to be raised for the first time on appeal or meritless. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and the pending motions are denied. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). -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.
