Franklin v. Nuckles 160 F. App'x 553

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Haywood Franklin, Jr., appeals the district court’s1 adverse judgment, following a bench trial, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Because Franklin has not moved for preparation of a trial transcript, it is impossible to determine whether the “facts” he lists were supported by substantial evidence, or whether the district court misapplied the law to the facts that were established. See Fed. R.App. P. 10(b) (it is appellant’s duty to order transcript of portions of trial relevant to issues raised on appeal); Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., 827 F.2d 384, 386 (8th Cir.1987) (per curiam) (in absence of trial transcript, appellate court cannot rule on weight of evi*554dence), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1071, 108 S.Ct. 1041, 98 L.Ed.2d 1004 (1988). Further, to the extent Franklin is challenging the district court’s credibility findings, this court gives due regard to the district court’s opportunity to judge witness credibility. See Estate of Davis v. Delo, 115 F.3d 1388, 1394 (8th Cir.1997). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.