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. Kamber

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


January 4, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CARLOS A. KAMBER, DEFENDANT.

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

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on a variety of motions and documents filed by defendant Carlos A. Kamber (Docs. 45-52). Kamber filed these motions pro se, although he is represented by counsel Stephen R. Welby.

A defendant does not have a right to file his own motions or documents 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). The Court hereby ORDERS that Kamber's motions and documents (Docs. 45-52) be STRICKEN. The Court will take up the matter of representation by counsel at the final pretrial conference, which is scheduled for January 29, 2010.

Prior to the motions stricken by this order, Kamber had filed pro se motions on two separate occasions while represented by counsel. Both times, the Court explained to him that he cannot filed his own motions while he is represented by counsel (Docs. 21 & 39). It further warned him that if he continued to make further pro se filings while he is represented by counsel, the Court would instruct the Clerk of Court to refuse to accept them for filing (Doc. 39). Nevertheless, Kamber has persisted in his efforts to file pro se motions and documents while represented by counsel. Consequently, as it warned it would do, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to refuse to accept from Kamber any pro se motion or document while he is represented by counsel and to return any such tendered motion to him unfiled.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100104

© 1992-2010 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.