U.S. v. MAYHEW, 5:13-CR-00199-F-2. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160107862
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jan. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. FOX , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on the government's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Pro Se Pleadings [DE-183]. While the defendant has himself made a number of pro se motions, several of which the government now moves to dismiss, the defendant has not responded to the present motion. The government contends (1) that the defendant does not have a right both to counsel and to represent himself pro se, see, e.g., United States v. Singleton, 107
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. FOX , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on the government's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Pro Se Pleadings [DE-183]. While the defendant has himself made a number of pro se motions, several of which the government now moves to dismiss, the defendant has not responded to the present motion. The government contends (1) that the defendant does not have a right both to counsel and to represent himself pro se, see, e.g., United States v. Singleton, 107 F..
More
ORDER
JAMES C. FOX, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court on the government's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Pro Se Pleadings [DE-183]. While the defendant has himself made a number of pro se motions, several of which the government now moves to dismiss, the defendant has not responded to the present motion.
The government contends (1) that the defendant does not have a right both to counsel and to represent himself pro se, see, e.g., United States v. Singleton, 107 F.3d 1091, 1096 (4th Cir. 1997) (holding that a defendant may waive the right to self-representation by proceeding to trial and taking other actions inconsistent with self-representation), and (2) that the defendant's pro se motions appear intended to harass and delay. The court agrees. The defendant has benefitted throughout these proceedings from the assistance of counsel; the defendant's counsel has filed motions on his behalf; and the defendant's pro se motions appear intended only to delay and harass. For those reasons, the government's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Pro Se Pleadings [DE-183] is ALLOWED. Accordingly, the defendant's pro se motions for reconsideration [DE-167] and for recusal [DE-181] are DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
