USA v. Boyar, 2:17-CR-21 JCM (GWF. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20171214f73
Visitors: 14
Filed: Dec. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 13, 2017
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Presently before the court is defendant Adam Younassoghlou's motion to expedite sentencing. (ECF No. 232). As the court noted in its prior order on the same issue, (ECF No. 221), defendant is represented by counsel, and thus defendant is not authorized to file motions pro se. Defendant attempts to categorize his filing with the court as a "written correspondence (no per [sic] se motion)." (ECF No. 232). Regardless of how the court categorizes the
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Presently before the court is defendant Adam Younassoghlou's motion to expedite sentencing. (ECF No. 232). As the court noted in its prior order on the same issue, (ECF No. 221), defendant is represented by counsel, and thus defendant is not authorized to file motions pro se. Defendant attempts to categorize his filing with the court as a "written correspondence (no per [sic] se motion)." (ECF No. 232). Regardless of how the court categorizes the f..
More
ORDER
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Presently before the court is defendant Adam Younassoghlou's motion to expedite sentencing. (ECF No. 232).
As the court noted in its prior order on the same issue, (ECF No. 221), defendant is represented by counsel, and thus defendant is not authorized to file motions pro se.
Defendant attempts to categorize his filing with the court as a "written correspondence (no per [sic] se motion)." (ECF No. 232). Regardless of how the court categorizes the filing, defendant cannot directly file a request for expedited sentencing, as he is represented by counsel.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion to expedite sentencing (ECF No. 232) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
Source: Leagle
