Unpublished Dispositionunited States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Samuel J.m. Davis, Jr., Defendant-appellant, 856 F.2d 196 (6th Cir. 1988)

Before KENNEDY and WELLFORD, Circuit Judges, and HERMAN JACOB WEBER, District Judge.^* 

ORDER

This matter has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

A review of the file shows that the criminal defendant, Davis, seeks to appeal the order of the district court entered June 27, 1988, denying his pretrial motion to act as co-counsel in his criminal trial with his court-appointed attorney. Appellant appealed from that order on July 6, 1988. The district court docket sheet reflects that Davis' criminal trial is scheduled to commence August 22, 1988.

This court lacks jurisdiction in this appeal. The order denying the defendant's motion for "hybrid representation" does not fall within the narrow class of situations in criminal prosecutions which are permitted interlocutory review under the collateral order exception of Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). See United States v. Bratcher, 833 F.2d 69, 72 (6th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 108 S. Ct. 760 (1988). Moreover, a criminal defendant has no constitutionally protected right to proceed pro se in addition to being represented by an attorney at his trial. See United States v. Mosley, 810 F.2d 93, 97-98 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 108 S. Ct. 129 (1987).

It is ORDERED that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.