IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
December 28, 2007
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur J. Schwab United States District Judge
ORDER OF COURT
On October 26, 2007, Defendant Michael Delbridge filed, pro se, a document captioned "Notice of Amended Motion and De Novo Motion" (doc. no. 155), which consisted of a response to the government's response (doc. no. 152) in opposition to his motion to dismiss the indictment (doc. no. 148) (which motion to dismiss had already been denied by Order dated October 3, 2007 (doc. no. 153)). This "Notice of Amended Motion and De Novo Motion" (doc. no. 155) appeared to include a motion to dismiss the indictment on the grounds of prosecutorial vindictiveness, a motion to suppress evidence and a motion to allow defendant to withdraw his guilty plea on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to raise these and other issues.
On October 30, 2007, this Court denied all aspects of defendant's "Notice of Amended Motion and De Novo Motion" (doc. no. 155) on October 30, 2007, for the reasons stated in the Order of Court (doc. no. 156).
On October 27, 2007, defendant filed a pro se "Supplement Motion to Motion of Amended Motion and De Novo Motion" (doc. no. 160), apparently as a supplement to the "Notice of Amended Motion and De Novo Motion" which this Court denied by Order of Court dated October 30, 2007 (doc. no. 156). For the reasons stated therein, to the extent this latest document may be construed as a supplemental motion, it is HEREBY DENIED.
The Court has appointed counsel to represent defendant at the sentencing hearing currently scheduled for February 1, 2008, and to file any objections and a sentencing memorandum on or before January 11, 2008. Given that time frame, the Court expects that counsel will meet with the defendant forthwith.
SO ORDERED this 28th day of December, 2007.
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.