Opinion
CR16-0284JLR
05-19-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DONALD MCCOY, JR., Defendant.
ORDER
JAMES L. ROBART, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Before the court is Defendant Donald McCoy, Jr.'s motion for appointment of counsel. (Mot. (Dkt. # 87).) Mr. McCoy filed the instant motion pro se, even though he is represented by counsel from the Federal Public Defender's Office. (See generally Mot.; Dkt. (listing Vanessa Pai-Thompson and Andrew Kennedy as counsel of record for Mr. McCoy).) A person who is represented by counsel cannot file pro se motions. See United States v. Gallardo, 915 F.Supp. 216, 218 n.1 (D. Nev. 1995); see also Le v. Almager, No. C 08-03293 SBA, 2013 WL 415632, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2013) (“A court need not consider pro se motions filed by a party who remains represented by counsel.”). Thus, the court STRIKES Mr. McCoy's pro se motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. # 87).
To the extent that Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Pai-Thompson wish to withdraw as counsel for Mr. McCoy, they must follow the procedures as outlined in Local Rule 83.2(b). See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 83.2(b); see also Local Criminal Rules W.D. Wash. LCrR 1(a) (stating that Local Rule 83.2(b) applies to criminal matters). Until they do so, they remain counsel for Mr. McCoy, and the court will not consider any pleadings filed by Mr. McCoy pro se. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 83.2(b) (“No attorney shall withdraw an appearance in any case . . . except by leave of court . . . .”); Gallardo, 915 F.Supp. at 218 n.1; Le, 2013 WL 415632, at *1.