Skip to main content

WALL v. MEFFORD (2019)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Gary WALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R. MEFFORD; J. Testerman; E. Rasnick, Correctional Officer of R.O.S.P.; J. Barker, Correctional Officer of R.O.S.P., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-7108

Decided: March 20, 2019

Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Gary Wall, Appellant Pro Se.

Gary Wall appeals from the district court's judgment entered after a jury returned a verdict in favor of Appellees on Wall's First and Sixth Amendment claims raised pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012).* The record does not contain a transcript of the jury proceedings. An 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. R. 10(c). An appellant proceeding on appeal in forma pauperis is entitled to transcripts at government expense only in certain circumstances. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (2012). By failing to produce a transcript or to request and qualify for the production of a transcript at government expense, Wall has waived review of the issues on appeal that depend upon the transcript to show error. See generally Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Keller v. Prince George's Cty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). As no error appears on the record before us, we affirm the district court's order. 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.



FOOTNOTE.   Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012), the parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Copied to clipboard