United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
McCann King United States Magistrate Judge.
United States of America and defendant Mark F. Speakman
entered into a plea agreement whereby defendant agreed to
enter a plea of guilty to Counts 1, 2, and 3 of the
Information, which charges him with wire fraud in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Count 1), money
laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (Count 2),
and filing a false or fraudulent tax return in violation of
26 U.S.C. § 7206(1)(Count 3). The parties have also
agreed to the entry of a forfeiture judgment. Plea
Agreement, ECF No. 3. On December 8, 2016, defendant,
accompanied by his counsel, appeared for an arraignment and
entry of guilty pleas. Defendant consented, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(3), to enter a guilty plea before a
Magistrate Judge. See United States v. Cukaj, 2001
WL 1587410 at *1 (6th Cir. 2001) [Magistrate Judge
may accept a guilty plea with the express consent of the
defendant and where no objection to the report and
recommendation is filed]; United States v. Torres,
258 F.3d 791, 796 (8th Cir. 2001); United
States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261, 263-69 (5th
Cir. 1997); United States v. Ciapponi, 77 F.3d 1247,
1251 (10th Cir. 1996). Defendant also waived his
right to an indictment in open court and after being advised
of the nature of the charge and of his rights. See
Fed. R. Crim P. 7(b).
the plea proceeding, the undersigned observed the appearance
and responsiveness of defendant in answering questions. Based
on that observation, the undersigned is satisfied that, at
the time he entered his guilty pleas, defendant was in full
possession of his faculties, was not suffering from any
apparent physical or mental illness, and was not under the
influence of narcotics or alcohol.
to accepting defendant's plea, the undersigned addressed
defendant personally and in open court and determined his
competence to plead. Based on the observations of the
undersigned, defendant understands the nature and meaning of
the charges returned in the Information and the
consequences of his pleas of guilty to those charges.
Defendant was also addressed personally and in open court and
advised of each of the rights referred to in Rule 11 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
engaged in the colloquy required by Rule 11, the Court
concludes that defendant's pleas are voluntary. Defendant
acknowledged that the plea agreement signed by him, his
attorney and the attorney for the United States and filed on
November 21, 2016, represents the only promises made by
anyone regarding the charges in the Information.
Defendant was advised that the District Judge may accept or
reject the plea agreement and that, even if the Court refuses
to accept any provision of the plea agreement not binding on
the Court, defendant may nevertheless not withdraw his guilty
confirmed the accuracy of the material aspects of the
statement of facts supporting the charge. He confirmed that
he is pleading guilty to Counts 1, 2, and 3 of the
Information because he is in fact guilty of those
offenses. The Court concludes that there is a
factual basis for the pleas.
Court concludes that defendant's pleas of guilty to
Counts 1. 2. And 3 of the Information are knowingly
and voluntarily made with understanding of the nature and
meaning of the charges and of the consequences of the pleas.
therefore RECOMMENDED that defendant's guilty pleas to
Counts 1, 2, and 3 of the Information be accepted.
Decision on acceptance or rejection of the plea agreement was
deferred for consideration by the District Judge after the
preparation of a presentence investigation report.
accordance with S.D. Ohio Crim. R. 32.1, and as expressly
agreed to by defendant through counsel, a written presentence
investigation report will be prepared by the United States
Probation Office. Defendant will be asked to provide
information; defendant's attorney may be present if
defendant so wishes. Objections to the presentence report
must be made in accordance with the rules of this Court.
party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report
and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14)
days, file and serve on all parties objections to the
Report and Recommendation, specifically designating
this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof
in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to
objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy thereof. F.R. Civ. P. 72(b).
parties are specifically advised that failure to object to
the Report and Recommendation will result in a
waiver of the right to de novo review by the
District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the
District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation.
See Thomas v. Arn,474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v.
Detroit Federation of Teachers, Local ...