United States v. Castro-Ortiz

          THE HONORABLE NEIL V. WAKE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

          FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

          HONORABLE MICHELLE H. BURNS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Upon Defendant's request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before United States Magistrate Judge Michelle H. Burns on May 3, 2019, with the written consents of the Defendant, counsel for the Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

         In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the Defendant under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel, and the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and of counsel for Defendant, I FIND as follows:

         (1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charge to which Defendant pleads and the elements of the offense to which Defendant is pleading guilty;

         (2) that Defendant understands the right to trial by jury, to persist in a plea of not guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial and at every other stage of the proceedings, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, to testify and present evidence, to compel the attendance of witnesses and the right against compelled self-incrimination;

         (3) that Defendant understands the maximum possible penalty for the offense to which Defendant is pleading guilty, including imprisonment, fine and supervised release, any mandatory minimum penalty, and applicable forfeiture, the effect of the supervised release term; and the Court's authority to order restitution and its obligation to impose a special assessment;

         (4) that Defendant understands the Court's obligation to calculate the applicable sentencing guideline range and to consider that range, possible departures under the Sentencing Guidelines, and other sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); and that Defendant understands that the sentencing guidelines are advisory, not mandatory, and that the Court may sentence outside those guidelines;

         (5) that the plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the parties;

         (6) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

         (7) that Defendant understands that statements under oath may later be used in a prosecution for perjury or false statements;

         (8) that Defendant understands that by pleading guilty, is waiving the right to a jury trial;

         (9) that Defendant understands the terms of any plea agreement provision waiving the right to appeal or to collaterally attack the sentence and has knowingly, ...