News Focus
News Focus
Followers 244
Posts 55847
Boards Moderated 12
Alias Born 04/12/2001

Re: scion post# 168051

Wednesday, 02/01/2012 8:47:13 AM

Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:47:13 AM

Post# of 169298
01/31/2012 269 ORDER denying 266 Motion as to Rufus Paul Harris (1); denying 266 Motion to Transfer to another facility and other miscellaneous relief. Signed by Judge Timothy C. Batten, Sr on 1/31/12. (rsh) (Entered: 01/31/2012)

Doc 269 PDF file
https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/yNQcdd

Extract:

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant Rufus Paul Harris's pro se motion to be transferred to a different correctional facility and for other miscellaneous relief [266]. Harris contends that he should be transferred because he does not have access to the software and legal materials he needs to prepare for his upcoming sentencing. In addition to a transfer, Harris asks to Court to grant him access to his laptop computer, which he contends has all of the software and supporting documentation that he will need for his sentencing.

Harris's request will be denied because he is currently represented by counsel appointed under the Criminal Justice Act. This not only precludes the Court's consideration of his pro se motion, LCrR 57.1(D)(3), but it also undercuts any right to access a law library, see Smith v. Hutchins, 426 F. App'x 785, 789 (11th Cir. 2011) ('''[WJhile adequate law libraries are one constitutionally acceptable method to assure meaningful access to the courts, our decision here ... does not foreclose alternative means to achieve that goal,' such as the provision of professional legal assistance to prisoners." (quoting Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 830-31 (1977))). Therefore, Harris's motion [266] is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of January, 2012.

Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today