U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1984

Ronald Roy Henderson v. United States

Ronald Roy Henderson v. United States
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided June 5, 1984 · Kennedy, Pregerson, Nelson
734 F.2d 483; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 21846 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Michael M. Angello, San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant., Michael Walsh, Warren P. Reese, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for defendantappellee.

Ronald Roy Henderson v. United States

Cases that cite this one

23 later published cases cite this decision.

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

On February 14, 1984 this court entered an order worded as follows:

Appellant’s renewed motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis is granted to the extent that preparation of the reporter’s transcript shall be at government expense under 28 U.S.C. § 753(f).

The Administrative Office of U.S. Courts has refused payment to the court reporter because the February 14 order did not specifically state that the appeal was “not frivolous (but presents a substantial issue).”

An order of this court directing production of a transcript at government expense pursuant to § 753(f) implicitly embodies a finding by the court that the appeal presents a substantial issue. Indeed, the court could not enter such an order without necessarily reaching such a conclusion. The February 14 order, and like orders from this court, shall be interpreted as certifications under § 753(f) by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts. Furthermore, a finding is made nunc pro tunc that this appeal is not frivolous and presents a substantial issue.

The Administrative Office will compensate the reporter for the transcript produced pursuant to the February 14 order.

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