U.S. v. Davis, 5:14-CR-240-BR. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160506c45
Visitors: 11
Filed: May 05, 2016
Latest Update: May 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . On 23 December 2015, the court denied all of defendant's pro se motions, with the exception of two motions for appointment of new counsel, DE ## 151, 214, because he is represented by counsel. (DE # 216.) Further, the court directed the Clerk to enter any future pro se motion on the docket and terminate it without further order of the court, other than a motion for appointment of new counsel. ( Id. ) Since that time, the court has found that
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . On 23 December 2015, the court denied all of defendant's pro se motions, with the exception of two motions for appointment of new counsel, DE ## 151, 214, because he is represented by counsel. (DE # 216.) Further, the court directed the Clerk to enter any future pro se motion on the docket and terminate it without further order of the court, other than a motion for appointment of new counsel. ( Id. ) Since that time, the court has found that ..
More
ORDER
W. EARL BRITT, Senior District Judge.
On 23 December 2015, the court denied all of defendant's pro se motions, with the exception of two motions for appointment of new counsel, DE ## 151, 214, because he is represented by counsel. (DE # 216.) Further, the court directed the Clerk to enter any future pro se motion on the docket and terminate it without further order of the court, other than a motion for appointment of new counsel. (Id.) Since that time, the court has found that defendant is presently suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense and committed him to the custody of the Attorney General for treatment. (DE # 267.) In the meantime, defendant has filed pro se multiple motions pertaining to the appointment of counsel, among other things, and requests for copies of various documents. Because defendant is represented by counsel and because the issue of appointment of new counsel will be preserved for further review, all pending pro se motions are DENIED except DE ## 151, 214. As for any future motion that defendant may file pro se, the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter the motion on the docket and terminate it without further order of the court. The Clerk need not respond to any copy request from defendant pro se.
Source: Leagle
