United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division
OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on Defendant Gustavo Andres
Perez's (“Defendant”) pro se Motion
for Transcripts  (“Motion”). Defendant is
advised that he should send all future requests for relief to
the Clerk's Office and not directly to the Court. The
address for the Clerk's Office for the Northern District
of Georgia is below:
United States District Court Clerk's Office Richard B.
Russell Federal Building 2211 United States Courthouse 75 Ted
Turner Drive, SW Atlanta, GA 30303-3309
February 12, 2015, Defendant was sentenced to fifty-four (54)
months incarceration with three (3) years of supervised
release, after pleading guilty to one count of Conspiracy to
Commit Access Device Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §
371, and one count of Aggravated Identity Theft, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A and 2. (, ). Defendant did
not file a direct appeal of his conviction or sentence.
11, 2016,  Defendant filed his Motion to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct his Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2255  (“Section 2255 Motion”). On August 24,
2016, the Court issued an order dismissing Defendant's
Section 2255 Motion , because it was filed outside the
one-year statutory limitation period. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255(f); see also Fed. R. App. P.
4(b)(1)(A)(i), 4(b)(6). The Court denied a certificate of
appealability. (). Defendant did not appeal the dismissal
of his Section 2255 Motion.
March 20, 2017, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied
Defendant's Application for Leave to File a Second or
Successive Section 2255 Motion. ().
4, 2017, Defendant filed his Motion for Transcripts.
Defendant requests that the Court provide him copies of
transcripts in this matter, at the government's expense,
so that he may seek a reduction in sentence. Defendant states
that he does not have the resources to hire an attorney and
“receives very little financial support from [his]
family.” (Mot. at 1). Defendant does not explain which
transcripts he is requesting.
U.S.C. § 753(f) (“Section 753(f)”) provides
that indigent defendants “in proceedings brought under
2255” are entitled to transcripts at government expense
“if the trial judge . . . certifies that the suit . . .
is not frivolous and that the transcript is needed to decide
the issue presented by the suit.” 28 U.S.C. §
753(f). Absent the Section 753(f) exception,
“[i]ndigent federal prisoners are not entitled to
copies of transcripts at government expense for the purpose
of preparing a collateral attack on a conviction.”
United States v. Adamson, 2017 WL 894441, at *2
(11th Cir. 2017); citing United States v. Herrera,
474 F.2d 1049, 1049 (5th Cir. 1973); Skinner v. United
States, 434 F.2d 1036, 1037 (5th Cir.
1970). A defendant “is not entitled to
obtain copies of court records at the government's
expense to search for possible defects merely because he is
an indigent.” Herrera, 474 F.2d at 1049.
is not entitled to receive copies of transcripts at the
government's expense. Section 753(f) does not apply
because there is no pending Section 2255 Motion for which a
transcript would be needed. The Court cannot grant
Defendant's request simply because he intends on seeking
a sentence reduction or pursuing some other attack on his
sentence. The Court has no basis to grant Defendant's
Motion and it is denied.
foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
Defendant Gustavo Andres Perez's pro se Motion
for Transcripts  is DENIED.