Leon Hawkins v. David Castillo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LEON HAWKINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DAVID CASTILLO,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 13-16440
D.C. No. 1:09-cv-00771-LJO-JLT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 25, 2015**
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Leon Hawkins appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment following a jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim. We have jurisdiction under 28
FILED
SEP 08 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
We cannot review Hawkins’ contentions challenging his jury trial because
Hawkins has failed to provide the relevant trial transcripts required to review the
alleged errors. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Syncom Capital Corp. v. Wade, 924
F.2d 167, 169 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam) (dismissing appeal by pro se appellant
for failure to provide relevant trial transcripts).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hawkins’ motions
to appoint counsel because Hawkins did not demonstrate exceptional
circumstances. See Palmer v. Valdez, 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (setting
forth standard of review and “exceptional circumstances” requirements).
AFFIRMED.
13-16440 2

-- 2 of 2 --