Howard v. Reed, Corr Off ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 96-7133
    VIRGIL HOWARD,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CORRECTIONAL OFFICER REED, Evans Correctional
    Institute,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    and
    SUPERVISOR THOMAS, Evans Correctional Institution,
    Defendant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence. William B. Traxler, Jr., District
    Judge. (CA-93-2161-21)
    Submitted:   January 9, 1997              Decided:   January 23, 1997
    Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Virgil Howard, Appellant Pro Se. George Conrad Derrick, BRIDGES,
    ORR, DERRICK & ERVIN, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order entering judgment
    for Appellee in accordance with the jury's verdict. The record does
    not contain a transcript of the trial. Appellant has the burden of
    including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of the
    proceedings material to the issues raised on appeal. Fed. R. App.
    P. 10(b); 4th Cir. Local R. 10(c). Appellants proceeding on appeal
    in forma pauperis are entitled to transcripts at government expense
    only in certain circumstances. 
    28 U.S.C. § 753
    (f) (1994). By fail-
    ing to produce a transcript or to qualify for the production of a
    transcript at government expense, Appellant has waived review of
    the issues on appeal which depend upon the transcript to show
    error. Powell v. Estelle, 
    959 F.2d 22
    , 26 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
    
    506 U.S. 1025
     (1992); Keller v. Prince George's Co., 
    827 F.2d 952
    ,
    954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). We have reviewed the record before the
    court and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
    error. We therefore affirm the district court's order. We dispense
    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96-7133

Filed Date: 1/23/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2014