Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Morris Tyler v. Leroy Cartledge, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's orders denying Morris Tyler's motion for copies of court documents and granting in part and denying in part his motion for reconsideration. The court found that Tyler did not have a habeas petition pending when he filed his motion for copies, and he did not demonstrate a need for the copies, as the documents were either already provided to him or unnecessary for his proposed habeas application. The court concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-09-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6735

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's orders denying Morris Tyler's motion for copies of court documents and granting in part and denying in part his motion for reconsideration. The court found that Tyler did not have a habeas petition pending when he filed his motion for copies, and he did not demonstrate a need for the copies, as the documents were either already provided to him or unnecessary for his proposed habeas application. The court concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views3 pages

    Morris Tyler v. Leroy Cartledge, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's orders denying Morris Tyler's motion for copies of court documents and granting in part and denying in part his motion for reconsideration. The court found that Tyler did not have a habeas petition pending when he filed his motion for copies, and he did not demonstrate a need for the copies, as the documents were either already provided to him or unnecessary for his proposed habeas application. The court concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6735

    MORRIS TYLER,
    Petitioner Appellant,
    v.
    LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville.
    J. Michelle Childs, District
    Judge. (6:13-cv-03076-JMC)

    Submitted:

    September 25, 2014

    Decided:

    September 30, 2014

    Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Morris Tyler, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior


    Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Morris

    Tyler

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    denying his motion for copies and its order granting in part and
    denying in part his motion for reconsideration of that order.

    district court judge before whom a habeas petition is pending


    may order a district court clerk to provide copies of court
    documents
    proceeding

    at
    in

    government
    forma

    expense

    pauperis.

    to
    28

    habeas

    U.S.C.

    petitioner

    2250

    (2012).

    However, provision of such copies is a matter of discretion with


    the district court before which the habeas petition is pending.
    See United States v. Connors, 904 F.2d 535, 536 (9th Cir. 1990)
    (necessity of pending habeas petition); Walker v. United States,
    424 F.2d 278, 278-79 (5th Cir. 1970) (same).
    Here, Tyler had no habeas petition pending at the time
    he

    filed

    his

    motion

    for

    copies.

    Moreover,

    he

    did

    not

    demonstrate a need for copies, where the documents he sought


    were either provided to him previously or are not necessary to
    the filing of his proposed 28 U.S.C. 2244 (2012) application.
    Finding no abuse of discretion in the district courts rulings,
    we affirm the orders at issue.

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

    in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
    the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like