ORDER RE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF DISCOVERY OF "FALSE IMPRISONMENT" AND "FALSE ARREST"

(ECF No. 115)

BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.

Defendant Cyrus Dennis Braswell, proceeding pro se, is charged with three counts of mailing a threatening communication to J.K.S., a federal judge, in violation of 18 U.S.C § 876(c). Pending before this Court is Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration of this Court's order denying discovery of documents and witnesses for purported defenses of false imprisonment and false arrest. (Doc. 109.) Defendant previously requested vast amounts of discovery, which the Court denied. (See Doc. 109.) In the Motion for Reconsideration filed on November 26, 2018, Defendant asks for reconsideration because he needs to prepare for his defenses of false imprisonment and false arrest. Aside from Defendant's abusive and foul language contained the motion, Defendant offers nothing new regarding the discovery. He merely disagrees with the Court's ruling.

Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, when filing a motion for reconsideration of an order, a party must show "what new or different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion" and "why the facts or circumstances were not shown at the time of the prior motion." Local Rule 430(i).

This Court finds no reason to reconsider its ruling that the purported defenses of false imprisonment and false arrest, on his underlying drug conviction, are not defenses to the current charges. That defendant believes he is wrongly imprisoned is not a defense to threats against a federal judge. Defendant has not presented any new or different facts from which the Court should reconsider its prior ruling.

Further, in this Motion for Reconsideration, Defendant uses foul and abusive language and makes what appear to be threats of violence against judicial officers, including the undersigned. Defendant was cautioned in Court at the hearing on November 26, 2018 that any filing which contains such abusive or foul language will be stricken and not considered. Defendant was also cautioned that such conduct may result in a denial of his self-representation. A pro se criminal defendant must be "able and willing to abide by rules of procedure and courtroom protocol," McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, 173, 104 S.Ct. 944, 79 L.Ed.2d 122 (1984); "the trial judge may terminate self-representation by a defendant who deliberately engages in serious and obstructionist misconduct." Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 834 n. 46 (1975). The Court will not address the threats at this time.

For the reasons stated, Defendant's motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 115) is HEREBY DENIED.

Defendant is again admonished that filings containing inappropriate language will be stricken and not considered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.