Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Spicer

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


December 9, 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JASON SPICER, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert U.S. District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Jason Spicer's pro se Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. 307). Spicer seeks appointment of counsel to assist in his potential eligibility under the amended crack cocaine sentencing guidelines. However, the Court appointed Federal Public Defender Judith Kuenneke as counsel for Spicer on January 22, 2008, and Kuenneke remains Spicer's attorney of record.

"The right to 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, is forbidden. See United States v. Oreye, 263 F.3d 669, 672-73 (7th Cir.2001).

In this case, Spicer has been granted representation by the Federal Public Defender. He is free to consult with his attorney in order to ensure that the Court is fully informed as to the specifics of his case and in order to ensure that the appropriate motions are filed. However, the Court will strike pro se motions by Spicer so long as he is represented by counsel.

Therefore, the Court STRIKES the instant motion (Doc. 307) from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20091209

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.