Opinion
Case No. 2:03-CR-564 JCM
01-30-2018
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff(s), v. LOUIS MATTHEWS, Defendant(s).
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant Louis Matthews's motion for copies. (ECF No. 93).
Defendant is represented by counsel in both this case and in his other case in front of this court, see U.S. v. Matthews, case no. 2:15-cr-00062-JCM-CWH-2. Therefore, defendant is not authorized to file motions pro se. See, e.g., United States v. El-Alamin, 574 F.3d 915, 923 (8th Cir. 2009); United States v. Hildreth, 485 F.3d 1120, 1125 (10th Cir. 2007); United States v. Vampire Nation, 451 F.3d 189, 206 n.17 (3d Cir. 2006).
Further, plaintiff has not demonstrated that he cannot afford to pay for the copies, and therefore has not demonstrated that he has the right to obtain copies of these documents free of charge. See Helfrich v. Neven, 2:14-cv-01725-RFB-NJK, 2015 WL 3875820, at *3 (D. Nev. June 22, 2015). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion for copies (ECF No. 93) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
DATED January 30, 2018.
/s/ James C. Mahan
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE