UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
March 20, 2012
STANTON J. THOMPSON, PLAINTIFF,
LEE RYKER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Bryan Purdue's motion to strike plaintiff Stanton J. Thompson's pro se motion (Doc. 31) on the grounds that Thompson is now represented by counsel Theodore R. Bynum, but Bynum has not signed the motion in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (Doc. 32).
A defendant does not have a right to file his own motions 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 GRANTS Purdue's motion to strike (Doc. 32) and ORDERS that Thompson's motion (Doc. 31) be STRICKEN.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
J. Phil Gilbert
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.