Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
No. 92-1877
ALBERT PONGONIS,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
RONALD DESANTIS, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
__________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Lawrence P. Cohen, U.S. Magistrate Judge]
_____________________
___________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
___________________
__________________
__________________
Per Curiam.
__________
action
(plus
Plaintiff-appellant filed
pendent
state
claims)
city's
police chief.
contended that
De Santis
without probable
case was
tried
magistrate.
directed
Among
At the
against Ronald
De
plaintiff
to
close of
verdict for
rights
other things,
a civil
used excessive
a jury
presided
the evidence,
the city
and
force.
The
over by
the magistrate
police chief
on the
custom upon
which to
basis
jury
found for
found for
court.
defendant De
Santis.
defendants on the
The magistrate
equitable claims
The
also
tried to
the
of the evidence.
he
is
attacking
the sufficiency
underlying the
has
appellate
forfeited
transcript.
Muniz Ramirez
_____________
F.2d 1357,
Consequently, to the
review
of
the
evidence
magistrate's rulings, he
by failing
to
order
the
appellant raises
fails to provide
-2-
transcript
court, this
of
the
pertinent
circuit . . .
proceedings in
the
district
that we will
arguments.
1.
disqualified
himself from
presiding
Cohen
disagree.
The
be
of Magistrate
the trial
as the
trial
indicates that,
at
familiarity with
Magistrate Cohen to
the
in
the
eventually
even
the
did) to
if defense
preside,
we
Moreover,
prior to
see
no
trial to
basis for
no
bias
indication that
jury and
appellant
for new
was a
"friend" of
Therefore,
to
disqualification.
(as they
Magistrate Cohen
or
it
preside over
consented
for
1990,
the case,
a magistrate.
did ask
allegation in
Magistrate Cohen
parties
trial before
counsel
there is
unsupported
after the
event
We
Consequently, in
would have
trial
judge.
beginning in
Magistrate Cohen.
Cohen's
because
designated
docket
objected
Appellant's
trial, filed
against him,
defense counsel
that
is not
Appellant contends
his case
government expense.
Plaintiff's
-3-
at government expense is
courts
constitutional
have concluded
or
statutory
that
right
an
to
indigent has
have
deposition costs
provided at
case.
v.
Tedder v.
______
Kozakiewicz, 833
___________
denied,
______
286,
288-90 (6th
(1983);
1987),
McNeil
______
474 (3rd
(1988); Johnson
_______
Cir.
831
U.S.
965
a civil
1987), cert.
_____
v. Hubbard,
_______
F.2d 1368,
or
1989); Boring
______
Cir.
v. Lowney,
______
Marshals Service v.
________________
government expense in
F.2d 468,
witness
no
698 F.2d
464 U.S.
1373
917
(7th Cir.
was arrested,
market
allowed
only
two or three
vendors to appear
We see no indication
on appellant's behalf.
or in the
Nor on
relevance of
explained what
added.
In any event,
-4-
the
magistrate
cumulative
would
evidence.
have
had
discretion
to
exclude
find no error.
3.
Appellant challenges
appellant's motion
ever
the
field.
We
have said
that when
magistrate's denial
agents' testimony
position."
84 (1st Cir.
in a law enforcement
government agents
have greater
by virtue
of their
are key
"inclined to
merely
of
denied, 111 S.
faith in
official
Ct. 2053
(1991).
_____________
Appellant, however,
he
wanted to
know whether
any jurors
disqualification.
1037
discretion
(8th
1992)
(court
did
not
952 F.2d
abuse
its
friends,
however, is not a
F.2d
had "close
Rather,
enforcement officer,
1034,
question.
788-92 (11th
rejecting defendant's
law enforcement).
Cir. 1991)
(court
Thomas, 946
______
did not
err in
with ties to
-5-
with a transcript of the voir dire and trial, we can not tell
whether
the
concerning
magistrate
potential
did
bias
in fact
in
favor
question
the
of
enforcement
law
jurors
officers
States v.
______
to
85 (court's failure
including
are entitled
On
bias in favor of
circumstances,
government agents
See United
___ ______
to no more
the present
-6-
instruction
that
credibility than
record, appellant
has