Opinion
Cr. 21-10158-MLW
03-16-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THIAGO DE SOUZA PRADO, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WOLF, D.J.
On January 17, 2023, defendant Thiago De Souza Prado informed the court that he no longer wished to proceed pro se and wished to be represented by John F. Palmer, Esq. See Dkt. No. 658. The court appointed Mr. Palmer to represent Prado. Id. On March 3, 2023, Prado filed a pro se motion for leave of court to file an interlocutory appeal (Dkt. No. 835). Because Prado is represented by counsel, he does not have a right to file his own motions. See United States v. Lopez-Soto, 960 F.3d 1, 15 (1st Cir. 2020). While the court could in limited circumstances exercise its discretion to decide a pro se motion by a defendant who is represented, see United States v. Nivica, 887 F.2d 1110, 1121 (1st Cir. 1989), it is not doing so here, in part because Prado's motion is unmeritorious. Interlocutory appeals are rarely permitted in criminal cases, and the narrow exceptions to the rule of finality do not apply here. See United States v. Joseph, 26 F.4th 528, 532 (1st Cir. 2022).
Therefore, Prado's motion for leave (Dkt. No. 835) is hereby DENIED.