JAMES C. FOX, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court on the pro se Motion to Appoint New Counsel and Motion for Copy of Discovery Materials [DE-148] filed by Defendant Aaron Coppedge ("Coppedge"). In the pro se filing, it appears that Coppedge is dissatisfied with the services of his court-appointed attorney and requests new counsel. Specifically, Coppedge states that "there's A conflict oflntrest with Steven Hight being back on my Case After a Jury Trial of Guilty... feels as ifhe doesn't have my best Intrest in Dealing with my case but working with the Government Glenn Perry." Coppedge further states that he doesn't "feel ComFortable with [Steven Hight] on my Case anymore and I'm Requesting A NEW CJA Appointed Attorney."
The Sixth Amendment provides that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." Although the Sixth Amendment affords a criminal defendant the counsel of his choosing, "the right to counsel ofchoice does not extend to defendants who require counsel to be appointed for them." United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140,151 (2006) (emphasis added). Here, Coppedge is being represented by an experienced court-appointed attorney. As there is no evidence ofany conflicting interest or a "total lack of communication," United States v. Reevey, 364 F.3d 151, 156 (4th Cir. 2004), Coppedge's motion for new counsel is
Coppedge also requests that a copy of discovery materials be provided. It appears that counsel for Coppedge has possession of the discovery materials and therefore, to the extent that Coppedge requests a copy of these discovery materials from counsel, that request is
SO ORDERED.