Opinion
8:23CR92
04-16-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. PATRICK HOSHOR, Defendant.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLEA OF GUILTY
Michael D. Nelson United States Magistrate Judge
After orally consenting to proceed before a magistrate judge, the defendant, together with counsel and in the presence of counsel for the government, appeared before the undersigned and tendered a plea of guilty. Before doing so, defendant was advised of the charges, the penalties and the right to appear before a United States District Judge.
After being sworn, the defendant was orally examined by me in open court as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The defendant was also given the advice required by that Rule. Finally, the defendant was given a full opportunity to address the court and ask questions.
Counsel for the government and counsel for the defendant were given the opportunity to suggest additional questions by the court. Moreover, both counsel orally certified that they were of the opinion that the plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary and that there was a factual basis for the plea.
Therefore, I find and conclude that: (1) the plea is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary; (2) there is a factual basis for the plea; (3) the provisions of Rule 11 and any other provisions of the law governing the submission of guilty pleas have been complied with; (4) a petition to enter a plea of guilty, on a form approved by the court, was completed by the defendant, defendant's counsel and counsel for the government, accompanied the defendant's plea, and was placed in the court file; (5) any plea agreement is in writing and was placed in the court file; (6) there are no agreements or stipulations other than as contained in the written plea agreement.
IT IS RECOMMENDED to Judge Brian C. Buescher that, after de novo review, he accept the guilty plea and find the defendant guilty of the crime(s) to which the defendant tendered a guilty plea; and he not accept the plea agreement at this time, but rather that he consider the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) agreement at sentencing.
IT IS ORDERED that if any party desires to object to the findings and recommendation, they shall do so no later than 14 calendar days following the date of the findings and recommendation or they may be deemed to have waived the right to object to adoption of the findings and recommendation.