Wabashaw v. Jansen

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

ELROY L. WABASHAW,

Petitioner, 8:24CV312

vs. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JAMES JANSEN, OCC;

Respondent.

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s correspondence dated July 1, 2025, which the Court construes as a motion. Filing No. 15. Liberally construed, Petitioner asks the Court to provide him a free copy of his habeas petition “for purposes of an appeal to the Eighth Circuit of [this] court[’]s . . . denial of [his] Writ of Habeas Corpus on June 20th, 2025.” Id. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2250, If on any application for a writ of habeas corpus an order has been made permitting the petitioner to prosecute the application in forma pauperis, the clerk of any court of the United States shall furnish to the petitioner without cost certified copies of such documents or parts of the record on file in his office as may be required by order of the judge before whom the application is pending.

Petitioner is proceeding in forma pauperis here. See Filing No. 6. However, Petitioner has not demonstrated a need for the copy of his petition which he requests. See Cassidy v. United States, 304 F. Supp. 864, 867–68 (E.D. Mo. 1969), aff'd, 428 F.2d 585 (8th Cir. 1970) (“The matter of granting a motion to produce copies of documents under section 2250, and if granted, what copies are to be furnished, is within the discretion of the court. Congress did not intend that documents should be furnished without a showing of need.”). Here, Petitioner indicates he wants a copy of his petition for purposes of an appeal, but Petitioner does not give any reason why a copy of his petition is necessary for any appeal he may file. Certainly, Petitioner does not need to provide a copy of his petition to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals with any notice of appeal he may file as the petition in this case will be automatically provided to the Eighth Circuit on appeal. Pursuant to 8th Cir. R. 30A(a)(2), In all pro se appeals, the entire district court record is available for review. lf the record is available in electronic format, the court will review the electronic version of the record. At the time a pro se notice of appeal is filed, the clerk of the district court must transmit to the clerk of this court the originals or paper copies of those portions of the original record which are not available through PACER, such as documentary exhibits, administrative records and state court files. In this case, the petition and all other documents submitted by Petitioner are contained within the Court record and are available in electronic format for review by the Court of Appeals. Thus, the Court finds Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a need for a copy of his petition in order to file an appeal of this Court’s June 20, 2025, Memorandum and Order and Judgment denying and dismissing his petition. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner's correspondence, Filing No. 15, construed as a motion, is denied without prejudice to reassertion to a motion for a copy of the petition based upon an adequate showing of need.

Dated this 8th day of July, 2025.

BY THE COURT:

Joseph F. Bataillon Senior United States District Judge