Opinion
Criminal Action No. 5:04-CR-41 (HL).
April 8, 2010
ORDER
Before the Court is a pro se motion to obtain transcripts filed by defendant Michael Martin (Doc. 84).
Martin has requested that the Court provide him with the following, free of charge: (1) the plea colloquy; (2) his plea agreement; (3) the sentencing transcripts; and (4) the pre-sentencing investigation report. Martin states that he needs these documents "to support a motion to enforce the terms of the plea agreement" and possibly to "commence an independent action pursuant to rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."
With regard to the transcript and the plea colloquy Martin requests, government funds may be allocated to fund the preparation of transcripts under 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). The statute provides, in part:
Fees for transcripts furnished . . . in habeas corpus proceedings to persons allowed to sue, defend, or appeal in forma pauperis, shall be paid by the United States out of moneys appropriated for those purposes. Fees for transcripts furnished in proceedings brought under section 2255 of this title to persons permitted to sue or appeal in forma pauperis shall be paid by the United States out of money appropriated for that purpose if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the suit or appeal is not frivolous and that the transcript is needed to decide the issue presented by the suit or appeal.
28 U.S. 753(f).
Martin has provided no information about his motion to enforce the terms of his plea agreement or Rule 60 action. If not brought as habeas proceedings, the Court is without authority to provide Martin transcripts free of charge. Even if the Court were to construe his anticipated enforcement motion and Rule 60 action as habeas corpus motions, Martin has provided no information about the merits of his claims in order for the court to certify that his suit is not frivolous.
As for Martin's request for his plea agreement and pre-sentence investigation report, those items should be available from his former counsel of record. Martin should contact his former counsel and request a copy of the documents he seeks from the case file.
For these reasons, Martin's pro se motion to obtain transcripts is denied.