Opinion
23-cr-20582
10-29-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RYAN ALEXANDER JONES, Defendant.
ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT'S PRO SE MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. 68)
MARK A. GOLDSMITH, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On October 16, 2024, Defendant Ryan Alexander Jones filed pro se a motion to dismiss (Dkt. 68). Defendant is represented in this action by counsel Linda A. Ashford.
Since Defendant is represented by counsel, Defendant is attempting to proceed in a “hybrid” fashion, both through counsel and pro se by way of his submission. See McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, 183 (1984). Although the Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants the right to conduct their own defense by representing themselves, see Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), the right of self-representation does not include the right to proceed in a hybrid manner, see McKaskle, 465 U.S. at 183 (“Faretta does not require a trial judge to permit ‘hybrid' representation . . . .”); see also United States v. Mosely, 810 F.2d 93, 97-98 (6th Cir. 1987) (“[T]he question whether to allow a defendant to participate in his own defense along with counsel in ‘hybrid representation' is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court.”).
The Court, in the exercise of its discretion, will not permit Defendant to proceed in a hybrid manner. Therefore, Defendant's pro se motion to dismiss (Dkt. 68) is stricken from the record. As long as Defendant is represented, he must seek relief through counsel.
SO ORDERED.