From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Sutton

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
May 3, 2017
Case No. 2:17-cr-3 (W.D. Mich. May. 3, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 2:17-cr-3

05-03-2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL JAMAL SUTTON, Defendant.


HON. Paul L. Maloney REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to W.D. MICH. L.CR.R. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on May 3, 2017, after receiving the written consent of defendant and all counsel. At the hearing, defendant Michael Jamal Sutton entered a plea of guilty to Count 2, charging defendant with Assault of an Intimate Partner in violation of 18:113(a)(7), 18:113(b)(1), (3), 18:2266(7)(A)(i)(I) and (II), 18:1151, 18:1152, in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the written plea agreement. On the basis of the record made at the hearing, I find that defendant is fully capable and competent to enter an informed plea; that the plea is made knowingly and with full understanding of each of the rights waived by defendant; that it is made voluntarily and free from any force, threats, or promises, apart from the promises in the plea agreement; that the defendant understands the nature of the charge and penalties provided by law; and that the plea has a sufficient basis in fact.

I therefore recommend that defendant's plea of guilty to Count 2 be accepted, that the court adjudicate defendant guilty, and that the written plea agreement be considered for acceptance at the time of sentencing. It is further recommended that defendant remain detained pending sentencing. Acceptance of the plea, adjudication of guilt, acceptance of the plea agreement, determination of defendant's status pending sentencing, and imposition of sentence are specifically reserved for the district judge. Date: May 3, 2017

/s/ Timothy P . Greeley

TIMOTHY P. GREELEY

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO PARTIES

You have the right to de novo review of the foregoing findings by the district judge. Any application for review must be in writing, must specify the portions of the findings or proceedings objected to, and must be filed and served no later than fourteen days after the plea hearing. See W.D. MICH. L.CR.R. 11.1(d).


Summaries of

United States v. Sutton

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
May 3, 2017
Case No. 2:17-cr-3 (W.D. Mich. May. 3, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Sutton

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL JAMAL SUTTON, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 3, 2017

Citations

Case No. 2:17-cr-3 (W.D. Mich. May. 3, 2017)