it was necessary to withdraw permission for Mr. Brunwasser to appear on behalf of the defendant pro hac vice. As was stated in part in the Order which accompanied that Memorandum Opinion: "The Court's Courtroom Deputy shall contact [local counsel] Mr. Jacobovitz promptly with the objective of moving towards a speedy resolution of this case."
That goal was not to be achieved. Mr. Jacobovitz was contacted promptly, and it appears that he telephoned defendant at 8:00 o'clock on the morning of November 25. It appears that defendant recorded that conversation, and a purported transcript of it was filed with the Court as an attachment to the motion which is the subject of this Memorandum Order.
On November 30, 1987, Messrs. Gibson and Brunwasser filed herein a Motion for Reconsideration, Reargument, To Amend the November 24, 1987 Order or Judgment of United States District Judge Stanley S. Harris and for F.R.C.P. 60(b) Relief and for Clarification.
Of course, Messrs. Gibson and Brunwasser had every right to request reconsideration. However, exercising that right has led to more delay. The Government opposed the motion for reconsideration on December 3. A reply by Messrs. Gibson and Brunwasser would have been due by December 15; none was filed.
The Court sees no need to deal with the many murky matters raised by Mr. Brunwasser in the motion for reconsideration.
The entire record makes it overwhelmingly clear that the motion for reconsideration must be denied; Mr. Brunwasser will not be heard again in open court in this case.
Remaining for consideration are Mr. Jacobovitz' two pleadings requesting leave to withdraw as local counsel. The Court recognizes that Mr. Brunwasser's extraordinary handling of this case, including but not limited to his blatant disregard of the important requirements of Local Rule 104 (and of the Court's specific direction that the rule be complied with), have placed Mr. Jacobovitz in an unenviable and uncomfortable position. However, with the compulsory removal of Mr. Brunwasser from the case, the Court is reluctant to permit Mr. Jacobovitz to withdraw unless and until Mr. Gibson selects an alternative counsel. Accordingly, Mr. Jacobovitz' motions are denied without prejudice.
More than six months now have passed since the indictment, and the Court still has been unable to conclude a hearing on the pending motion to suppress. The entire District Court will be in recess from 5:00 p.m. on December 23, 1987, to 9:00 a.m. on January 4, 1988.
Defendant is urged either to make peace with Mr. Jacobovitz, who could represent him quite competently and whom he himself selected on September 18, 1987, or to chose an alternative counsel promptly. Of course, defendant has the right to represent himself, but the Court strongly urges him to utilize counsel.
In summary, then, it hereby is
ORDERED, that the Motion for Reconsideration, Reargument, To Amend the November 24, 1987 Order or Judgment of United States District Judge Stanley S. Harris and for F.R.C.P. 60(b) Relief and for Clarification is denied. It hereby further is
ORDERED, that Mr. Jacobovitz' Renewal of Motion To Withdraw and his Supplemental Motion To Withdraw and Request for Expedited Ruling are denied without prejudice. It hereby further is
ORDERED, that the Informational Response of Defendant and Request for an Evidentiary Hearing is denied. It hereby further is
ORDERED, that the hearing on the motion to suppress shall resume at 1:30 p.m. on January 5, 1988, in Courtroom 14.