United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 99-1059NE _____________ Donald H. Davis, Jr., * * Appellant, * On Appeal from the United * States District Court v. * for the District of * Nebraska.

Officer Frank Laskley; Officer * Jacque Points, * [Not To Be Published] * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: June 6, 2000 Filed: June 14, 2000 ___________ Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, BOWMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Donald H. Davis appeals the District Court’s1 denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) motion for a new trial, which Davis had sought on grounds that the District Court wrongly excluded certain evidence. To the extent we are able to review Davis’s arguments on appeal without a trial transcript, see Fed. R. App. P 10(b)(1)(A) (appellant must order transcript); 8th Cir. R. 30A(b)(5) (same); Schmid v. United Bhd.

The Honorable William G. Cambridge, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. of Carpenters, 827 F.2d 384, 386 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam) (plaintiff’s failure to provide complete transcript renders it impossible to review evidence presented at trial), we conclude that no legal error resulting in a miscarriage of justice occurred at Davis’s trial. Thus, the Court did not abuse its discretion by denying a new trial, see Gray v. Bicknell, 86 F.3d 1472, 1480 (8th Cir. 1996) (authority to grant new trial is within discretion of trial court).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-