From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clay v. Miniard

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jul 26, 2022
3:21-CV-12074 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 26, 2022)

Opinion

3:21-CV-12074

07-26-2022

DEWAYNE CLAY, Petitioner, v. GARY MINIARD, Respondent.


ORDER STRIKING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO STAY AND HIS APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS [ECF Nos. 7, 8)

ROBERT H. CLELAND, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Petitioner Dewayne Clay is represented by legal counsel in this federal habeas proceeding. Nevertheless, Petitioner submitted a pro se motion to stay the proceedings and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. A party who is represented by counsel must rely on counsel to submit court filings and is not entitled to proceed in a “hybrid” manner by appearing both through counsel and on his or her own behalf. United States v. Steele, 919 F.3d 965, 975 (6th Cir. 2019) (“It is well settled that there is no constitutional right to hybrid representation.”); United States v. Vannoy, No.17-20551, 2019 WL 587281, *3 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 13, 2019) (striking pro se filings because defendant was represented by counsel). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's pro se filings, ECF Nos. 7 and 8, are STRICKEN from the record. If Petitioner is no longer represented by counsel, he must notify the court and his counsel should move to withdraw from representation.


Summaries of

Clay v. Miniard

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jul 26, 2022
3:21-CV-12074 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 26, 2022)
Case details for

Clay v. Miniard

Case Details

Full title:DEWAYNE CLAY, Petitioner, v. GARY MINIARD, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Jul 26, 2022

Citations

3:21-CV-12074 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 26, 2022)