Opinion
Case Number: 3:14-cr-120
09-04-2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SHAUN MICHAEL MAWBY, Defendant.
District Judge Timothy S. Black
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This case came on for hearing on September 4, 2014. At the outset, Defendant consented on the record to the conduct of this proceeding by the Magistrate Judge.
Having conducted the colloquy required by Fed. R. Crim.P. 11, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court accept the Plea Agreement of the parties and find that the Defendant's plea of guilty pursuant to that Agreement is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary and that the agreed Statement of Facts provides an adequate factual basis for conviction. Anticipating the Court's adoption of this Report, the Magistrate Judge referred Defendant to the United States Probation Department for a presentence investigation. September 4, 2014.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to seventeen days because this Report is being served by one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F). Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).