UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS and ORDER

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

The indictment in this case was returned on July 29, 2010, and it charged Clint Gregory, Siavash Poursartip and Sara Shirazi with engaging in a scheme to defraud Caltrans, and with providing and accepting bribes. Specifically, the indictment alleges that Poursartip and Shirazi conspired to provide bribes to Gregory, who was employed as a Senior Electrical Engineer at Caltrans. It alleges that Gregory accepted those bribes, and that all three defendants worked together to manipulate the State's contract bidding process to wrongfully benefit Poursartip and Shirazi's business, Infotek Associates. Counts One through Seven charge all three defendants with mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Defendants Poursartip and Shirazi are also charged in Count Eight with conspiring to commit bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 666(a)(2), and in Count Nine with committing bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(2).

Almost a year before the case was indicted, defendant Gregory became aware of the investigation and informed the government that he wished to cooperate. He submitted to multiple interviews with law enforcement. During these interviews, he discussed three payments evidenced in bank records from Poursartip and/or Shirazi to accounts held in the names of fictitious entities Gregory created. He stated that these payments were bribes. He said the payments were the subject of negotiation between himself and Poursartip, and that their purpose was to keep him happy and ensure continued business for Infotek with Caltrans. These payments are listed as bribes in Count Eight.

Following the return of the indictment and Gregory's entry of a guilty plea, he was interviewed on additional occasions, and he consistently stated that the three payments were bribes. On Wednesday, October 21, during preparation for the jury trial scheduled to commence on November 9, 2015, the government again met with Gregory. During this meeting, he was questioned aggressively concerning the three alleged bribe payments. He conceded that in fact there was no reason for his co-defendants to know that the payments they made were going to Gregory, as opposed to the fictitious companies to which the checks were written. He further conceded that his earlier statements regarding purported discussions with his co-defendants about the bribe payments were not accurate. In sum, he conceded that these payments were not bribes.

In light of the foregoing, the government will not use Gregory as a witness at trial. His statements render Counts Eight and Nine of the indictment unsustainable. They also have an impact on the charged mail fraud counts. The bribery allegations are specifically set forth in the description of the manner and means of the scheme, and they provided relevant evidence concerning the issue of intent. In addition, before the case was indicted it was anticipated that Gregory's testimony would be part of the government's presentation of its case. The absence of that testimony necessarily alters the government's case for trial.

Since the developments described above, the government has re-evaluated both the strength and nature of this case as a whole. The absence of the bribery allegations mean that what was once a public corruption case is now limited to an alleged scheme concerning state contracting procedures and resulting in uncertain losses to the State. This current view of the case fails to implicate a federal interest sufficient to justify the expenditure of resources necessary to try this case and engage in associated litigation.

In light of the foregoing, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a), the government exercises its discretion to request that the Court dismiss Counts One through Seven, insofar as they are alleged against defendants Poursartip and Shirazi, and Counts Eight and Nine in their entirety. Counsel for defendants Poursartip and Shirazi do not oppose this motion.

ORDER

For the reasons stated above, it is hereby ORDERED that pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 48(a), Counts One through Nine are hereby dismissed as against defendants Poursartip and Shirazi. The hearing currently set for November 5, 2015, and the jury trial currently set for November 9, 2015, are vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED.