IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Crim. Action No. 2:14-000135-KD-N

)

TAKASHA STEVENSON, )

Defendant. )

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This action is before the Court on defendant Takasha Stevenson’s “Motion for 

Declaration of Indigency and Waiver of Fees” filed April 30, 2015. (Doc. 581) The 

motion was referred to the undersigned by United States District Judge Kristi K. 

DuBose on May 7, 2015. A hearing was held before the undersigned on May 18, 

2015.1 Present at the hearing were defendant Takasha Stevenson, her retained 

counsel of record Michael P. Hanle, Esq., and Assistant United States Attorney 

Gloria Bedwell. Upon consideration of the motion, the evidence presented during 

the hearing and the arguments of counsel, it is the recommendation of the 

undersigned that the defendant’s motion for waiver of the transcript fee (Doc. 581)

be GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

Stevenson moves the Court to waive the requirement that she pay the fees 

for a transcript of the proceedings before this Court on basis that she is indigent.2

 1 Section 310.10.20 of the Guide to the Judiciary provides, in pertinent part:

(a) In responding to requests for services under 18 U.S.C. 3006A(e) by a person 

represented by retained counsel, the court should inquire into the fee arrangement 

between the retained attorney and the client.

2 At the hearing, counsel for defendant clarified that the request was solely to waive the 

requirement for payment of the transcript of the proceedings in District Court. 

Case 2:14-cr-00135-KD-N Document 594 Filed 05/22/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:

<pageID>
2

At arraignment, Stevenson qualified for appointment of counsel under the Criminal 

Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, and counsel (CJA Panel Attorney Tim Fleming) was 

appointed to represent her in the criminal proceedings in this Court (Doc. 125, 

Financial Affidavit; Doc. 128, Order appointing counsel from the Criminal Justice 

Act Panel of Attorneys). Following her conviction after a jury trial, her appointed 

counsel filed a notice of appeal. (Doc. 545) 

Stevenson has now retained new counsel to represent her on appeal and 

represents to the Court that her family has paid his fee. In support of her motion to 

waive the fees for transcripts, Stevenson states, in sum, that no further funds are 

available from her family and that she is without means to pay the costs of the 

transcript. 

ANALYSIS

Under the Criminal Justice Act, after an appropriate inquiry in an ex parte

proceeding, the Court may authorize counsel to obtain transcripts if the Court finds 

that the transcripts are necessary and that the defendant is financially unable to 

purchase them. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(e) (providing for services other than 

counsel). “Fees for transcripts furnished in criminal proceedings to persons 

proceeding under the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, . . . shall be paid by 

the United States[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 753(f). 

At the time of her arrest, Stevenson was employed at a manufacturing plant. 

However, she qualified financially for appointment of counsel (Docs. 125, 128). 

Now that she has been sentenced and placed in the custody of the United States 

Marshal, she is no longer employed.3 Thus, her financial status has not improved

 3 At the time of the hearing Stevenson was being housed in the Mobile County Metro Jail in

Mobile, Alabama, awaiting designation by the Bureau of Prisons.

Case 2:14-cr-00135-KD-N Document 594 Filed 05/22/15 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:

<pageID>
3

since that time. Stevenson states that her family paid the fees of her recently 

retained counsel but that no further funds are available for purchase of a transcript. 

At the hearing, FBI Special Agent Craig Underwood testified regarding his 

criminal investigation, which included reviewing Stevenson’s income tax returns for 

the years 2007 through 2013 (excluding 2009). Specifically, Agent Underwood 

noted that in the years 2011, 2012, and 2013, although reporting incomes of 

$29,652, $40,039 and $33,535, respectively, Stevenson also reported business losses 

of $12,777 (2011), $19,193 (2012) and $11,507 (2013). (Govt. Ex. 3). In addition, 

during the years 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, cash deposits (made in increments of 

$500.00 or more) totaling $60,000.00 were made to 3 bank accounts owned by 

defendant. (Govt. Ex. 2) Agent Underwood also noted that during Stevenson’s trial 

on charges of money laundering, she testified that friends had given her large sums 

of cash and that the Government has been unable to account for this money. (Govt. 

Ex. 1) Finally, AUSA Bedwell proffered that Stevenson testified to, and evidence 

was admitted regarding, her personal assets and noted that a preliminary order of 

forfeiture for $25,270.00 has been entered in this case. (Doc. 555)

Counsel for defendant noted that she has been incarcerated since her 

sentencing on April 8, 2015, has lost her employment, and has no income. In 

addition, counsel noted that Stevenson is a single mother of two teenagers. 

Further, counsel elaborated on the information contained in the motion regarding 

his fee arrangement with Stevenson’s sister and mother.4 The undersigned finds 

that the fee arrangement is not unreasonable in relation to fees customarily paid to 

practitioners in the community for services in criminal matters of similar duration 

 

4 At this point in the hearing, AUSA Bedwell and Agent Underwood were excused from the 

proceedings. In addition, the recording of the hearing was ordered sealed.

Case 2:14-cr-00135-KD-N Document 594 Filed 05/22/15 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:

<pageID>
4

and complexity. (Guide To Judiciary Policy, § 310.10.20(b)). Upon consideration of 

the motion, the evidence submitted during the hearing, and argument by counsel, 

the undersigned finds that Stevenson has met the requirements of financial 

inability to obtain the transcript and the necessity5 of the services. Accordingly, it 

is the recommendation of the undersigned that Stevenson’s motion for waiver of the 

transcript fee (Doc. 581) be GRANTED, subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 

3006A(e)(3).6

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO FILE OBJECTIONS 

A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on all parties in the 

manner provided by law. Any party who objects to this recommendation or anything 

in it must, within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this document, file 

specific written objections with the Clerk of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); S.D. Ala. L.R. 72.4. The parties should note that under 

Eleventh Circuit Rule 3-1, “[a] party failing to object to a magistrate judge's 

findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation in 

accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge 

on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal 

 5 Although not stated in the motion, at the hearing counsel advised that the transcripts are 

necessary for the appeal, and the court concurs. See United States v. Ware, 2010 WL 

743032, *2 (M.D. Ala. Feb. 26, 2010) (“Counsel’s need for the transcripts at the critical 

juncture after conviction and before sentencing is apparent to the Court.”)

6 “(3) Maximum amounts.--Compensation to be paid to a person for services rendered by 

him to a person under this subsection, or to be paid to an organization for services rendered 

by an employee thereof, shall not exceed $2,400, exclusive of reimbursement for expenses 

reasonably incurred, unless payment in excess of that limit is certified by the court, or by 

the United States magistrate judge if the services were rendered in connection with a case 

disposed of entirely before him, as necessary to provide fair compensation for services of an 

unusual character or duration, and the amount of the excess payment is approved by the 

chief judge of the circuit. The chief judge of the circuit may delegate such approval 

authority to an active or senior circuit judge.”

Case 2:14-cr-00135-KD-N Document 594 Filed 05/22/15 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:

<pageID>
5

conclusions if the party was informed of the time period for objecting and the 

consequences on appeal for failing to object. In the absence of a proper objection, 

however, the court may review on appeal for plain error if necessary in the interests 

of justice.” 11th Cir. R. 3-1. In order to be specific, an objection must identify the 

specific finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for 

the objection, and specify the place in the Magistrate Judge’s report and 

recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An objection that 

merely incorporates by reference or refers to the briefing before the Magistrate 

Judge is not specific. 

DONE this the 22nd day of May 2015.

/s/ Katherine P. Nelson

____________________________

KATHERINE P. NELSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cr-00135-KD-N Document 594 Filed 05/22/15 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:

<pageID>