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. Dokich

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION


June 21, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MELVIN DOKICH, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

After Melvin Dokich ("Dokich") wrote the attached letter to this Court, seeking the appointment of counsel to represent him in two respects, this Court issued a brief April 16, 2010 memorandum order ("Order") denying that request. As the Order explained, even apart from any procedural problems with Dokich's request (such as the failure to submit a current showing of financial eligibility under the Criminal Justice Act ["CJA," 18 U.S.C. §3006A]), Dokich's submission was substantively deficient.

Now Dokich has submitted a renewed Motion for Appointment of Counsel, in which he explains at some length his version of the differences between him and counsel Stephen Eberhardt that led to the latter's withdrawal from representation. This Court is scarcely in a position to conduct a hearing to determine which of the sharply differing versions of events (or something in between) appears to be more credible. Instead the original reasons for denying the appointment of counsel, as set out in the Order, remain:

1. Fed. R. Crim. P. ("Rule") 35(a), because of its severe time limitation and other restrictions on its use by a defendant, take that Rule outside of the jurisdictional reach of this Court as a potential source of relief for Dokich.

2. None of the statutory purposes listed in the CJA extends to the other areas that Dokich refers to in his letter (including any possibility of relief under Rule 35(b)).

Accordingly Dokich's renewed motion for appointment of counsel is denied. This Court notes that he has appointed counsel representing him in connection with his currently pending appeal, and though the subject matter of his current motion is not a part of that designated representation, Dokich might perhaps inquire of that appointed counsel as to the possibility of informal assistance.

20100621

© 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.