USA v. Day

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:23-CR-13-MR-WCM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) ORDER
)
PAUL GORDON DAY, )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________ )
This matter came before the Court on May 1, 2023 following the
submission of a letter (“Letter”) by Defendant
pro se. Doc. 14. The Government
was represented by Assistant United States Attorney John Pritchard.
Defendant appeared with his attorney, Thomas Amburgey. This Order
memorializes the Court’s actions taken during those proceedings.
I. Competency
Defense counsel indicated that though Defendant does have some mental
health challenges, he believes that Defendant is competent. The Government
likewise indicated that it had no concerns with regard to Defendant’s
competency.
II. Potential Self-Representation
The Court then addressed the question, as raised by Defendant’s Letter,
of whether Defendant wished to represent himself. At the request of defense
counsel, and without objection from the Government, the courtroom and the
Case 1:23-cr-00013-MR-WCM Document 17 Filed 05/02/23 Page 1 of 2

2
record were sealed, and the Court heard from Defendant and counsel.
Afterward, the courtroom and the record were unsealed.
Defendant stated that he wished to continue to be represented by Mr.
Amburgey, who indicated that he was willing to continue representing
Defendant.
Consequently, no action was taken relative to Mr. Amburgey’s
representation.
III. Request for Detention Hearing to be Re – Opened
To the extent that Defendant’s Letter may be read as requesting that the
detention hearing previously conducted in this matter be reopened, Mr.
Amburgey indicated that, while he may wish to make such a request in the
future, he was not prepared to do so at the time.
Accordingly, to the extent the Letter is a
pro se request for the re-opening
of the prior detention hearing, it is procedurally improper under the Local
Rules given that Defendant continues to be represented by counsel. Therefore,
Defendant’s request was denied. LCrR 47.1(g).
It is so ordered.
Signed: May 1, 2023
Case 1:23-cr-00013-MR-WCM Document 17 Filed 05/02/23 Page 2 of 2