Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Peter Poole Iii v. Debbie Isaacs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


October 17, 2011

PETER POOLE III, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DEBBIE ISAACS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

APPEAL NO. 11-2903

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murphy, District Judge:

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. He now seeks preparation of the transcript at no charge for purposes of his appeal. He also seeks appointment of counsel.

Relating to the transcript request, the relevant statute provides, in pertinent part, that "[f]ees for transcripts furnished in [non-criminal, non-habeas corpus, and non-section 2255] proceedings 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). Thus, a court must determine that the appeal presents a "substantial question" before allowing a transcript to be provided at no charge. Handley v. Union Carbide Corp., 622 F. Supp. 1065, 1067 (S.D. W.Va. 1985). A "substantial question" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) is one that is "reasonably debatable." Ortiz v. Greyhound Corp., 192 F. Supp. 903, 905 (D. Md. 1959).

Plaintiff provides no specifics in his papers other than to disagree the Court's conclusion that violation of state law does not, in this instance, rise to a constitutional violation. Because Plaintiff has not shown that the Court's disposition of the case is reasonably debatable, his request for provision of the transcript at no charge is DENIED. Plaintiff shall return to the Clerk of Court the form Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet that was sent to him on August 19, 2011 (see Doc. 76), whether or not he intends to order the transcript.

With respect to his request for appointment of counsel, Plaintiff makes no showing that he has made any effort to obtain counsel on his own or been effectively precluded from doing so. See generally Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007) (en banc). Therefore, this request is DENIED without prejudice to making a sufficient request in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

G. PATRICK MURPHY United States District Judge

20111017

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.