Flores v. Nueces County, Texas et al, No. 2:2009cv00080 - Document 55 (S.D. Tex. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying without prejudice 54 MOTION for transcript at public expense.(Signed by Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington) Parties notified.(srussell, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Flores v. Nueces County, Texas et al Doc. 55 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MICHAEL FLORES, JR., Plaintiff, v. NUECES COUNTY, ET AL., Defendants. § § § § § § § C.A. NO. C-09-80 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR TRANSCRIPT AT PUBLIC EXPENSE Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro so and in forma pauperis filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging various constitutional violations. All parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge to hear this case. Plaintiff has filed an interlocutory appeal to the Fifth Circuit of an order denying him appointment of counsel (D.E. 46), and now moves for a transcript of the evidentiary hearing held June 4, 2009 (D.E. 54). Fees for transcripts furnished to persons permitted to appeal in forma pauperis shall be paid by the United States if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous (but presents a substantial question). 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). Payment by the United States for printing of the record on appeal and transcripts may also be ordered if the record or transcript is required by the appellate court. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c); Harvey v. Andrist, 754 F.2d 569, 571 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1126, 105 S.Ct. 2659 (1985). In this case plaintiff has not set forth the issues he plans to raise in his appeal; therefore a decision cannot be made as to whether the appeal is frivolous. The Fifth Dockets.Justia.com Circuit Court of Appeals has not indicated that it required a transcript of any of the proceedings in this case. Moreover plaintiff has not demonstrated why any transcripts would be necessary to brief and argue any points of error to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiff’s motion (D.E. 54) is denied without prejudice. ORDERED this 24th day of November, 2009. ____________________________________ B. JANICE ELLINGTON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
]]>
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.
