Opinion
No.: 3:16-CR-134-TAV-HBG-1
12-19-2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ELOY ALONZO, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This criminal case is before the Court on the defendant's pro se letter requesting a copy of the full docket sheet in his case [Doc. 132]. The defendant requests that he be provided a copy of the docket sheet in this matter apparently without cost. The defendant, who is currently incarcerated, requires the docket sheet to "do [his] motions."
Although the defendant has previously been deemed indigent for the purpose of appointing defense counsel [Doc. 23], "the [d]efendant's prior indigent status does not entitle him to free copies of the record," United States v. Hayworth, No. 3:14-cr-17, 2016 WL 8928571, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. Apr. 13, 2016). Indeed, "[t]he statutory right to proceed in forma pauperis [under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)] does not include the right to obtain copies of court orders without payment therefor." Douglas v. Green, 327 F.2d 661, 662 (6th Cir. 1964) (per curiam); accord Hurst v. Warden, No. 2:09-cv-1042, 2010 WL 1687675, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 22, 2010) ("Courts have consistently found that authorization to proceed in forma pauperis does not confer a right to free photocopies."); cf. Fazzini v. Gluch, 875 F.2d 863, at *2 (6th Cir. 1989) (table opinion) ("The right of access to the courts does not require that prison officials provide free, unlimited access to photocopying machines."). The Court also notes that the fee implicated here is relatively small, and the defendant has not explained why he is unable to collect the funds necessary to pay this fee.
For the reasons stated above, the Court hereby DENIES the defendant's pro se request for a copy of his docket sheet [Doc. 132]. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail to the defendant at the address listed on his letter copies of both this order and a request form for the materials he seeks.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Thomas A. Varlan
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE