U.S. v. WAITHE, 01-cv-40017-JPG. (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20140807c44
Visitors: 18
Filed: Aug. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on defendant Derek A. Waithe's pro se motion for status (Doc. 554). On February 24, 2012, Waithe filed a pro se motion for retroactive application of the crack cocaine guidelines and to appoint counsel (Doc. 527). This Court granted Waithe's motion to appoint counsel and appointed the Federal Public Defender's Office to represent him (Doc. 529). A litigant does not have a right to file his own motions
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on defendant Derek A. Waithe's pro se motion for status (Doc. 554). On February 24, 2012, Waithe filed a pro se motion for retroactive application of the crack cocaine guidelines and to appoint counsel (Doc. 527). This Court granted Waithe's motion to appoint counsel and appointed the Federal Public Defender's Office to represent him (Doc. 529). A litigant does not have a right to file his own motions w..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Derek A. Waithe's pro se motion for status (Doc. 554). On February 24, 2012, Waithe filed a pro se motion for retroactive application of the crack cocaine guidelines and to appoint counsel (Doc. 527). This Court granted Waithe's motion to appoint counsel and appointed the Federal Public Defender's Office to represent him (Doc. 529). A litigant does not have a right to file his own motions when he is represented by counsel. See Hayes v. Hawes, 921 F.2d 100, 102 (7th Cir. 1990) (per curiam). "Representation by counsel and self-representation are mutually exclusive." Cain v. Peters, 972 F.2d 748, 750 (7th Cir. 1992). So-called "hybrid representation" confuses and extends matters at trial and in other proceedings and, therefore, it is forbidden. See United States v. Oreye, 263 F.3d 669, 672-73 (7th Cir. 2001). The court may strike as improper any such pro se motions. See, e.g., United States v. Gwiazdzinski, 141 F.3d 784, 787 (7th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to STRIKE Waithe's pro se filing (Doc. 554). The Court suggests Waithe contact the Federal Public Defender's office for a status update on his case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
