Opinion
Criminal Action No. 99-070, Section "R".
May 5, 2005
ORDER AND REASONS
The Court has received a letter from petitioner Guillermo Marzon requesting the "transcripts, plea colloquy and sentencing hearing" related to his sentence of 240 months for violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 848(e) and of 18 U.S.C. § 2119. Marzon asserts that he is entitled to the documents under 28 U.S.C. § 2250.
On August 12, 1999, the Court sentenced Marzon to 240 months and ordered that the sentence run consecutively with a 15-year term of imprisonment imposed on Marzon by the District of Rhode Island in Docket Number 97-089-01. In February 2005, Marzon filed a motion to amend judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6), asking the Court to amend its judgment to impose its sentence concurrently with the term of imprisonment imposed by the District of Rhode Island. In criminal cases, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) provides that a court "may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed" except in certain designated circumstances. On February 18, 2005, the Court found that it was not permitted to modify the term of imprisonment because there was no indication that any of the circumstances listed in section 3582 were present. The Court also found that, to the extent that Marzon's motion might have been construed as an application for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, it was untimely because it was filed more than a year after his conviction became final. On March 2, 2005, Marzon filed a notice of appeal of the Court's order.
Marzon now requests that this Court order the production of documents related to his conviction and sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 2250. Section 2250 requires the court clerk to provide indigent petitioners free "certified copies of such documents or parts of the record on the file in his office as may be required by order of the judge before whom the application [for habeas relief] is pending." 28 U.S.C. § 2250 (emphasis added). A petitioner is not entitled to free transcripts unless he has an application for habeas relief pending in the district court. Id.; United States v. Resendez Paz, No. 03-40017, 2003 WL 22002665, at *1 (5th Cir. Aug. 20, 2003); Walker v. United States, 424 F.2d 278, 278-79 (5th Cir. 1970). To the extent that Marzon's "motion to amend judgment" could be construed as an application for habeas relief, this Court has denied the application, and Marzon has no other habeas corpus application pending before this Court. Accordingly, section 2250 is inapplicable. See Althouse v. Cockrell, No. 3:01-CV-0779-R, 2004 WL 377049, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 13, 2004).
Even if Marzon had an application for habeas corpus pending before this Court, the decision of whether to grant a request for the production of documents under section 2250 rests within the sound discretion of the district court. Chessman v. Teets, 239 F.2d 205, 214 (9th Cir. 1956), vacated on other grounds, 354 U.S. 156 (1957). Marzon has not explained why he needs the documents requested or why they are relevant, as he must do to justify the Court's exercise of discretion under section 2250. See Althouse, 2004 WL 377049, at *2. "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." Walker, 424 F.2d at 279. To obtain documents under 2250, Marzon would have to explain why he needs the requested documents and why they are relevant.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES petitioner's transcript request.