United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
McCann King United States Magistrate Judge.
Michael Anthony Bowman previously pleaded not guilty to an
indictment charging him with one count of possession with
intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841, and one count of
possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking
offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i).
Indictment, ECF No. 13. The United States and
defendant thereafter entered into a plea
agreement whereby defendant agreed to enter a plea
of guilty to both counts of the Indictment. On
August 3, 2018, defendant, accompanied by his counsel,
appeared for a change of 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).
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 plea, 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 pleas, 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 in the Indictment 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
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 June 11, 2018, represents the only promises made by anyone
regarding the charges in the Indictment. 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 his guilty
pleas but that, if he does not withdraw his 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 statement of facts supporting
the charges, which is attached to the Plea
Agreement. He confirmed that he is pleading guilty to
Counts 1 and 2 of the Indictment 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 and 2 of the Indictment 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 and 2 of the Indictment 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
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).
 Both counts of the Indictment
relate to events that occurred on February 14, 2018. A
typographical error in Count 1 of the Indictment,
however, resulted in the inclusion of extraneous language
referring to an additional, incorrect, date. At the change of
plea hearing, the United States moved to correct that
typographical error to strike the words “through and
including March 24, 2017, ” from Count 1 ...