From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Flerlage

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division at Lexington
Mar 17, 2011
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:10-CR-58-KKC (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2011)

Opinion

CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:10-CR-58-KKC.

March 17, 2011


OPINION AND ORDER


This matter is before the Court on a document filed by the Defendant which as been docketed as a Motion to Appoint Counsel and Motion for Extension of Time to Appeal [DE 41]. As to the Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to Appeal, the Defendant's Notice of Appeal [DE 40] was filed within the time prescribed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(b)(A) and, thus, the Court hereby ORDERS that the motion is DENIED as moot.

As to the Defendant's motion for the court to appoint counsel to represent him on appeal, pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 101(a), "[t]rial counsel in criminal cases, whether retained or appointed by the district court, is responsible for the continued representation of the client on appeal unless specifically relieved by" the United State Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Accordingly, Marcus Carey remains the Defendant's counsel on appeal unless he is specifically relieved of that duty by the Sixth Circuit. For this reason, the Court hereby ORDERS that the Defendant's motion to appoint counsel is also DENIED as moot.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Flerlage

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division at Lexington
Mar 17, 2011
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:10-CR-58-KKC (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Flerlage

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF v. NATHAN FLERLAGE, DEFENDANT

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division at Lexington

Date published: Mar 17, 2011

Citations

CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:10-CR-58-KKC (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2011)