IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
August 13, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
ANTONIO J. PAYTON, JR. DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert United States District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Antonio Payton's pro se motion for leave to amend and/or supplement his pro se motion for a reduction of his criminal sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual ("U.S.S.G.") § 1B1.10 (Doc. 217). Payton filed this motion pro se, although he is represented by counsel for the purposes of potentially seeking a sentence reduction. 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 ORDERS that Payton's motion for leave to amend and/or supplement (Doc. 217) be STRICKEN.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
J. Phil Gilbert
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.