United States v. Montecalvo
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71607
| E.D.N.Y | 2012Background
- Montecalvo is linked to Montecalvo Asphalt Paving Corp., which uses asphalt manufactured by John T. Montecalvo, Inc.
- Between 2003 and 2005 a group sought to control bidding on Long Island road-repair projects, including two contracts: Suffolk County DPW and Brookhaven Town purchasing.
- Montecalvo allegedly engaged in collusive conduct to rig bids for the Suffolk County Contract and the Brookhaven Contract.
- The Fehrs allegedly coordinated with Montecalvo and Haney to allocate work; the Brookhaven Contract portions were awarded on July 15, 2005, then rebid and awarded to the Fehrs’ company.
- Montecalvo was arrested on November 23, 2005 and indicted on December 16, 2005 along with nine others on two counts of mail fraud conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 1341).
- Throughout 2006–2011 involvement included negotiations over cooperation agreements and potential guilty pleas; the government declined to dismiss the indictment with prejudice in January 2012.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal with prejudice is warranted under the Speedy Trial Act | Government argues dismissal without prejudice is appropriate | Montecalvo urges dismissal with prejudice due to six-year delay and government laxity | Dismissal with prejudice granted under the Speedy Trial Act |
| Whether the delay was attributable to government fault and constitutes prejudice | Delay reflects a lackadaisical government attitude but some dialogue occurred | Delay shows government neglect and denial of timely prosecution | Yes; delay was due to government neglect and prejudice to defendant supports prejudice in favor of dismissal with prejudice |
| Whether the offense seriousness weighs against prejudice | Case involves serious bid-rigging and substantial losses | Non-violent nature reduces seriousness impact | Despite seriousness, other factors weigh toward dismissal with prejudice; court adopts prejudice due to delay |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Stayton, 791 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. 1986) (serious delay supports dismissal with prejudice; no bright-line rule for length of delay)
- United States v. Simmons, 786 F.2d 479 (2d Cir. 1986) (serious offenses warrant dismissal with prejudice for serious delay)
- United States v. Taylor, 487 U.S. 326 (1988) (prejudice and length of delay inform dismissal with or without prejudice)
- United States v. Giambrone, 920 F.2d 176 (2d Cir. 1990) (factors include government conduct; dismissal with prejudice appropriate for disregard of Speedy Trial Act)
- United States v. Mancuso, 302 F. Supp. 2d 23 (E.D.N.Y. 2004) (serious offense; duration and neglect considered in weighing prejudice)