Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Hampton

December 21, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DANIEL GLENN HAMPTON DEFENDANT



The opinion of the court was delivered by: H. Bruce Guyton United States Magistrate Judge

Jordan / Guyton

ORDER

All pretrial motions in this case have been referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for disposition or report and recommendation regarding disposition by the District Court as may be appropriate. The Court is in receipt of Defendant Daniel Glenn Hampton's pro se Motion to Postpone of Put Off a Case Until a Case That Involves Life or Death Can Be Heard [Doc. 74] and his most recent pro se Motion [Doc. 98] requesting a variety of forms of relief to include suppression of evidence and the invocation of a nebulous Due Process claim that appears to relate to a State of Tennessee forfeiture action. Mr. Hampton has also previously filed a pro se Motion for Medical Treatment, [Doc. 75], which has already been addressed by the Court.

Mr. Hampton is represented by Attorney Jonathan Moffatt, one of the most experienced practitioners in federal criminal matters who appears before this Court. Because Mr. Hampton is represented by counsel, the Court finds his motions violate Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, LR 83.4 Appearance and Withdrawal of Counsel, which provides, in relevant part:

(c) Representation Pro Se After Appearance by Counsel Whenever a party has appeared by attorney, that party may not thereafter appear or act in his or her own behalf in the action or proceeding, unless an order of substitution shall first have been made by the court, after notice by the party to the attorney and to the opposing party. However, the court may, in its discretion, hear a party in open court, notwithstanding the fact that the party is represented by an attorney.

Accordingly, Mr. Hampton's pro se motions are inappropriate and in violation of the rules of this Court. This Court will not proceed on the merits of a substantive motion filed pro se so long as Mr. Hampton is represented by counsel. For that reason, Mr. Hampton's Motion to Postpone of Put Off a Case Until a Case That Involves Life or Death Can Be Heard [Doc. 74] and Motion [Doc. 98] are DENIED.

While Mr. Hampton may continue to file pro se motions, the Court takes this opportunity to admonish him against doing so in the strongest terms. Mr. Hampton has availed himself of his right to counsel as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and this Court urges him consult that counsel or seek a new lawyer. Without the benefit of legal training and experience, Mr. Hampton may seriously and irreparably damage his defense to these criminal charges. This could come about by his inadvertently revealing attorney-client privileged information, compromising the most effective presentation of his defense or even disclosing to the Court, the public and the Office of the United States Attorney the particulars of his defense strategy. Although the damage may be accidental or unforeseen, it will not be possible to un-ring the bell later.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Motion to Postpone of Put Off a Case Until a Case That Involves Life or Death Can Be Heard [Doc. 74] is DENIED.

2. Motion [Doc. 98] is DENIED

20071221

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.