UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
FELICIA INEZ HAMLETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CR-99-362-1)
Submitted: April 28, 2005 Decided: May 5, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Felicia Inez Hamlett, Appellant Pro Se. Sonya LaGene Sacks, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Felicia Hamlett, a federal inmate, appeals the district
court’s denial of Hamlett’s request for free copies of an
investigation report and lab report transcripts. We affirm the
district court’s denial of the request.
Copies of transcripts may be provided to an indigent
litigant at government expense upon a showing by the litigant of a
particularized need for the documents. See Jones v.
Superintendent, Virginia State Farm, 460 F.2d 150, 152-53 (4th Cir.
1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 944 (1973). An indigent is not
entitled to free copies “merely to comb the record in the hope of
discovering some flaw.” United States v. Glass, 317 F.2d 200, 202
(4th Cir. 1963).
Hamlett’s request for copies of the report and
transcripts does not establish the requisite need under Jones. The
Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings require only that the
facts in support of a claim for relief be set forth in summary
form. Rule 2(b). Discovery may thereafter be available in the 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) proceeding. Rule 6. As Hamlett has failed to
establish why she cannot, without copies of the transcripts, set
forth in summary form the facts in support of her claim, we affirm
the district courts’ denial of her request. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
- 2 -
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -