Opinion
No. 2:97CV26-GHD
03-16-2021
VICTOR HURNS PETITIONER v. JAMES V. ANDERSON, ET AL. RESPONDENTS
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTIONS [84], [85] FOR COPIES OF VARIOUS PORTIONS OF THE RECORD
This matter comes before the court on the motions [84], [85] by the petitioner for copies of various documents from the record in this case. This case has been closed for over two decades, and the petitioner has not identified any specific need for these documents to collaterally attack his conviction. Indeed, this case is now before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for a determination regarding whether Mr. Hurns may file a successive habeas corpus petition. Mr. Hums has filed numerous challenges to this court's denial of habeas corpus relief over the years.
A prisoner is not entitled to a free transcript for the purpose of searching the record for defects in an effort to glean some basis to support an effort to overturn a criminal conviction. United States v. Herrera, 474 F.2d 1049 (5th Cir. 1973), There are two factors to consider when reviewing a petitioner's request for a copy of his trial transcript: (1) the value of the transcript to the petitioner in connection with the proceedings for which it is sought, and (2) the availability of alternative devices that would fulfill the same functions as a transcript. See, Tague v. Puckett, 874 F.2d 1013, 1014 (5th Cir. 1989) citing, Britt v. North Carolina, 404 U.S. 226, 227 (1971). In this case, Victor Hums has not identified a specific need for the documents. As such, the instant motions [84], [85] are DENIED without prejudice to the defendant's ability to seek the documents again after demonstrating specifically how they would assist during his pursuit of 28 U.S.C. § 2254 relief.
SO ORDERED, this, the 16th day of March, 2021.
/s/_________
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE