Information — United States v. Tracy D. Wade (Dkt. 138, S.D. Fla. No. 0:23-cr-60173)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 0:23-cr-60173-KMW · Doc. 138 · 2024-08-22 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
Case No. 23-cr-60173-CR-WILLIAMS 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
 
 
 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CAROLYN DENISE WADE, and 
TRACY D. WADE,   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Defendants. 
____________________________/ 
ORDER 
 
THIS CAUSE is before the Court following an order of reference [DE 129] by Senior 
United States District Judge Donald L. Graham regarding the Government’s ore tenus motion 
[DE 113] for a Garcia hearing.   
On July 15, 2024, I conducted a Garcia hearing, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 
Procedure 44(c), in light of the stated intention for Daryl Elliott Wilcox and Johnny Leonard 
McCray, Jr. to jointly represent both Defendants.  At the start of the July 15 hearing, given that 
the AUSA assigned to the case was unavailable that day, the Government requested the 
opportunity to file a memorandum explaining the potential conflicts of interest that could arise 
from joint representation in this case.  While I granted the Government’s request to submit its 
memorandum, I nonetheless proceed with the Garcia hearing, after excusing the Government in 
order to avoid any disclosure of privileged discussions between Defendants and their counsel.   
After obtaining a brief extension of time in order to obtain a full transcript of Tracy 
Wade’s testimony from Defendant Carolyn Wade’s May 2024 trial, the Government filed that 
memorandum on July 24, 2024.  [DE 108].   The next day, I entered an order finding, based on 
AT
Aug 22, 2024
FTL
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 138   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2024   Page 1 of 3

2 
 
their responses to my inquiries at the Garcia hearing, that the Defendants had knowingly, 
intelligently, and voluntarily waived the potential conflicts of interest that could arise out of 
defense counsels’ joint representation of the Defendants and that the Defendants had knowingly 
and intelligently waived their right to conflict-free counsel.  [DE 116].  While acknowledging 
that the Court (and the Defendants) did not have the benefit of the Government’s memorandum 
and the transcript of Mr. Wade’s testimony at the Garcia hearing, I found that the Court 
adequately addressed with the Defendants the potential conflicts raised in the Government’s 
memorandum, albeit with less specificity than the Government’s memorandum articulates.  Id. at 
n. 2.  Nevertheless, the Court has re-referred the Government’s motion for a Garcia hearing to 
me to ensure that the Defendants are aware of the facts and arguments made in the Government’s 
memorandum and that they have considered that information in deciding whether to waive their 
right to conflict-free counsel. 
Accordingly, it is hereby: 
 
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties shall confer and determine three dates 
and times at which counsel and both Defendants are available to conduct a further hearing before 
me.  The parties shall thereafter contact my courtroom deputy in order to schedule that further 
hearing.   
 
It is further ORDERED that, prior to the further hearing, defense counsel shall provide 
both Defendants with both the Government’s Memorandum in Connection with Rule 44(c) 
Garcia Hearing [DE 108] and the transcript excerpts of Tracy Wade’s testimony attached thereto 
[DE 108-1].  Defense counsel shall ensure that both Defendants have thoroughly read both the 
Government’s memorandum and the transcript excerpts prior to the hearing.  At the hearing the 
Court will ask each Defendant to confirm whether they have read the Government’s 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 138   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2024   Page 2 of 3

3 
 
memorandum and the transcript.  The Court will also give the Government an opportunity to 
further explain its concerns regarding potential conflicts.  The Court will thereafter conduct a 
further colloquy of the Defendants regarding whether they wish to proceed with joint 
representation and whether they wish waive their right to conflict-free counsel. 
 
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 22nd day of 
August, 2024.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
__________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JARED M. STRAUSS  
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 
 
 
Case 0:23-cr-60173-KMW   Document 138   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2024   Page 3 of 3

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.138.0.pdf

Size

153,133 bytes

SHA-256

20ad9ee4e2d7702de14ce2e3643d9550e76f57d440e7f603743e8c58610ad263

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.670191.138.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)