[Cite as State v. Ridley, 2011-Ohio-3496.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
LUCAS COUNTY
State of Ohio
Appellee
Court of Appeals No. L-10-1314
Trial Court No. CR0200903404
v.
George Ridley
Appellant
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
Decided: July 13, 2011
*****
George Ridley, pro se.
*****
PER CURIAM.
{¶ 1} Appellant, George Ridley, has filed a motion pro se to strike certain
telephone recordings from the record on appeal. Appellant is represented by counsel and
this court cannot entertain motions filed by appellant pro se. See State v. Tenace, 109
Ohio St.3d 451, 2006-Ohio-2987, ¶ 10; State v. Keenan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 133. In
State v. Keenan, the Ohio Supreme Court explained:
{¶ 2} "A defendant has no right to a 'hybrid' form of representation wherein he is
represented by counsel, but also acts simultaneously as his own counsel. McKaskle, 465
U.S. at 183, 104 S. Ct. at 953, 79 L. Ed. 2d at 136; State v. Thompson (1987), 33 Ohio St.
3d 1, 6, 514 N.E.2d 407, 414." State v. Keenan at 138.
{¶ 3} Accordingly, the motion is ordered stricken from the record.
MOTION DENIED.
Mark L. Pietrykowski, J.
_______________________________
JUDGE
Thomas J. Osowik, P.J.
Stephen A. Yarbrough, J.
CONCUR.
_______________________________
JUDGE
_______________________________
JUDGE
2.
