Owens v. United States

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina
DecidedOctober 21, 2019
Docket3:16-cv-00171
StatusUnknown

This text of Owens v. United States (Owens v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Owens v. United States, (W.D.N.C. 2019).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:16-cv-171-MOC 3:10-cr-88-MOC-2

ANTONIUS O’KEEFE OWENS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________)

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner’s pro se “Request for Permission to Supplemental Ground Two to § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(c),” (Doc. No. 8), and Letter, (Doc. No. 9), that was docketed as a Motion to Lift Stay.1 Petitioner is represented by counsel in this action that was brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to challenge his criminal sentence. There is no right to “hybrid representation” in which defendant is represented both by himself and by counsel. McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, 183 (1984); see Cain v. Peters, 972 F.2d 748, 750 (7th Cir.1992) (representation by counsel and self- representation are mutually exclusive entitlements in light of McKaskle ). Counsel has not adopted Petitioner’s pro se filings. Therefore they will be stricken as an unauthorized pro se filings. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner’s pro se “Request for Permission to Supplemental Ground Two to § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(c),” (Doc. No. 8), and Letter, (Doc. No. 9), that was docketed as a Motion to Lift Stay are STRICKEN.

1 This § 2255 case is stayed pursuant to United States v. Ali, 15-4433, (Doc. No. 7), which has itself been stayed pursuant to United States v. Jordan, 17-4751. Signed: October 21, 2019

fama □□ am akon oS Max O. Cogburn J i) United States District Judge al ag et

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

McKaskle v. Wiggins
465 U.S. 168 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Luther Cain v. Howard Peters and Roland Burris
972 F.2d 748 (Seventh Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Owens v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owens-v-united-states-ncwd-2019.