JACK AARON WALKER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1970-04-08
No. 28649
424 F.2d 278 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1970) Positive Treatment
Cited by 18 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

A federal prisoner is not entitled to free copies of court records unless a habeas corpus petition has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and is pending.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant, a federal prisoner, requested copies of his indictment and transcripts of his arraignment and sentencing. He had no pending appeal or motio…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Walker, a federal prisoner, filed his motion in the District Court requesting a copy of his indictment and transcripts of his arraignment and sentencing. He has no appeal pending, nor has he filed or attempted to file a motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, or a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the District Court. The District Court denied the motion. We affirm.1

Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 2250 provides that only where a petitioner for the writ of habeas corpus has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and his application is pending before the court is that petitioner entitled to be furnished copies of court records without cost. Harless v. United States, 5 Cir. 1964, 329 F. 2d 397. A federal prisoner is not entitled to obtain copies of court records at Government expense for the purpose of searching the record for possible error. Harless v. United States, supra; Culbert v. United States, 10 Cir. 1964, 325 F. 2d 920; Ketcherside v. United States, 6 Cir. 1963, 317 F. 2d 807.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

. Pursuant to Rule IS of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F. 2d 804, Part I; and Huth v. Southern Pacific Company, 5 Cir. 1969, 417 F. 2d 526; Part I.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Bonner v. Henderson, 517 F.2d 135 (5th Cir. 1975)
  • United States v. Cuya, 964 F.3d 969 (11th Cir. 2020)
    …er has not attempted to file a petition collaterally attacking his conviction, he is not entitled to obtain copies of court records at the government's expense under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to search the record for possible error."); Walker v. United States, 424 F.2d 278, 279 (5th Cir. 1970) (affirming the denial of a motion requesting an indictment and transcripts because "[a] federal prisoner is not entitled to obtain copies of court records at Government expense for the purpose of searching the record for possibl…
  • Mose Skinner v. United States, 434 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir. 1970)

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw