United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
L. GRAHAM, JUDGE.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
McCann King, United States Magistrate Judge.
Candace Bernice Villar is charged by Information
with conspiracy to defraud the United States by wire fraud in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 371, with making
false claims against the United States in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 287, 2, and with structuring monetary
transactions to avoid reporting requirements in violation of
31 U.S.C. § 5324. The United States of America and
defendant entered into a plea agreement whereby defendant
agreed to enter a plea of guilty to all three counts of the
Information. On January 8, 2018, defendant, accompanied
by her counsel, appeared for an arraignment and entry of
guilty plea proceeding. 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 her
right to an indictment in open court and after being advised
of the nature of the charges and of her 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 she entered her guilty pleas, defendant was in full
possession of her 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 pleas, the undersigned addressed
defendant personally and in open court and determined her
competence to plead. Based on the observations of the
undersigned, defendant understands the nature and meaning of
the charges in the Information and the consequences
of her 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
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 her, her
attorney and the attorney for the United States and filed on
November 20, 2017, 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. Defendant was further advised
that, if the Court refuses to accept the plea agreement,
defendant will have the opportunity to withdraw her guilty
pleas but that, if she does not withdraw her guilty pleas,
the District Judge may impose a sentence that is more severe
than the sentence contemplated in the plea agreement, up to
the statutory maximums.
confirmed the accuracy of the material aspects of the
statement of facts supporting the charges, which is attached
to the Plea Agreement. She confirmed that she is
pleading guilty to Counts 1 - 3 of the Information
because she 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 231 etc.,
829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v.
Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).