U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1970

Jack Aaron Walker v. United States

Jack Aaron Walker v. United States
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided April 8, 1970 · Gewin, Goldberg, Dyer
424 F.2d 278; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9897 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Jack Aaron Walker, pro se., John W. Stokes, Jr., U. S. Atty., J. Owen Forrester, Asst. U. S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.

Jack Aaron Walker v. United States

Cases that cite this one

38 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

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 *279 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.

1

. 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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.