Opinion
13-cv-14695
10-26-2021
ORDER STRIKING PRO SE FILINGS (ECF Nos. 428, 429, 430, and 431) BY PETITIONER OMAR RASHAD POUNCY
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
In this habeas action, Petitioner Omar Rashad Pouncy is (and has been) ably represented by a truly outstanding team of attorneys. They have made numerous appropriate and effective filings with the Court. Pouncy has nonetheless repeatedly filed his own briefs and submissions in an apparent effort to supplement the work of his attorneys. And this Court has repeatedly entered orders advising Pouncy that he may not do so - that he may not simultaneously proceed both through counsel and pro se. (See, e.g., Orders, ECF Nos. 274, 340, and 384.) Despite the clarity of the Court's prior orders (and in violation of them), Pouncy (who remains represented by terrific counsel) recently filed four pro se submissions with the Court. (See Pro Se Submissions, ECF Nos. 428, 429, 430, and 431.) For the reasons set forth in the Court's prior orders and because the submissions violate the Court's prior orders, the Court STRIKES all four submissions from the Court's docket.
While the Court has occasionally accepted pro se filings from Pouncy despite its prior orders, it declines to do so now. The Court sees no basis to permit Pouncy to submit his own filings at this point - when he remains exceptionally well-represented and after the Court has granted him a conditional writ of habeas corpus on one of his claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on October 26, 2021, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.