United States v. Arpi-Sumba

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LUIS GERARDO ARPI-SUMBA

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

Date published: Apr 20, 2016

DOCKET NO. 16-cr-00030-02 (W.D. La. Apr. 20, 2016)

Opinion

DOCKET NO. 16-cr-00030-02

04-20-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LUIS GERARDO ARPI-SUMBA

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY

JUDGE MINALDI

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON FELONY GUILTY PLEA BEFORE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b), and with the written and oral consent of the defendant, this matter has been referred by the District Court for administration of Guilty Plea and Allocution under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

This cause came before the undersigned U. S. Magistrate Judge on April 20, 2016 at which time the defendant expressed a desire to waive his right to plead guilty before a District Judge and enter into a plea before the U. S. Magistrate Judge. Defendant indicated on the record his desire to consent to proceed before the undersigned and executed a waiver. Defendant was at all times represented by counsel, Marcus Myers.

After said hearing and for reasons orally assigned, it is the finding of the undersigned that the defendant is fully competent, that his plea of guilty is knowing and voluntary, that his guilty plea to Count One of the Indictment is fully supported by the written factual basis acknowledged by defendant orally in court and by his signature on the written document. This factual basis supports each essential element of the offense to which the defendant pled.

Therefore the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court ACCEPT the guilty plea of the defendant, Luis Gerardo Arpi-Sumba, and that he be finally adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count One of the Indictment.

Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and FED. R. CIV. P. RULE 72(b), the parties have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court. Defendant, however, waived his right to file these written objections, and, accordingly, the matter is now deemed submitted to this district court for consideration.

THUS DONE this 20^th day of April, 2016.

/s/_________

KATHLEEN KAY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE