Opinion
CRIMINAL NO. C-15-50
03-23-2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SYLVIA ASHLEY COOPER
ORDER ACCEPTING GUILTY PLEA
Now before the Court is the Findings and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington containing her recommendation (1) that this Court adopt her findings that the Defendant's guilty plea in the above-styled and numbered cause was knowingly and voluntarily entered, with a full understanding of the consequences of the plea and the constitutional rights being waived, and that the plea was supported by an adequate basis in fact; (2) that the Court accept the Defendant's guilty plea; and (3) that the Court adjudge the Defendant guilty of the offense charged in Count One of the Indictment. (D.E. 24.)
On February 27, 2015, the Magistrate Judge, by designation and referral of this Court (pursuant to the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3) and this Court's standing order of referral) and with the consent of the parties, conducted the re-arraignment and guilty plea colloquy of the Defendant, Sylvia Ashley Cooper. The Indictment charged the Defendant with having committed the following offense:
On or about December 21, 2014, in the Corpus Christi Division of the Southern District of Texas and elsewhere within the jurisdiction of the Court, Defendant,
Sylvia Ashley Cooper,
did knowingly and in reckless disregard of the fact that Guadalupe Soto De Rodriguez was an alien who had come to, entered, and
remained in the United States in violation of law, transport, move, attempt to transport and attempt to move said alien within the United States in furtherance of such violation of law by means of a motor vehicle.(D.E. 20.) After being placed under oath and advised of the charge against her, as well as her right to a jury trial and the consequences of entering a plea of guilty, the Defendant entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment.
In violation of Title 8, United States Code, Sections 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and 1324(a)(1)(B)(ii).
More than fourteen days have passed since the parties, respectively, were served with the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, and no party has filed objections. The Court regards such omission as the parties' agreement with and acceptance of the Magistrate Judge's findings. When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's findings and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)); United States v. Rivas, 85 F.3d 193, 194 (5th Cir. 1996).
In the case at hand, the Court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and that there is no clear error. Furthermore, the Court finds that the Defendant, Sylvia Ashley Cooper, is fully competent and capable of entering an informed plea; that she is aware of the nature of the charge made against her, the consequences of her plea, and the nature of the constitutional rights that she is waiving; that her plea of guilty is a knowing and voluntary plea that did not result from force, threats, or promises (other than promises in a plea agreement); and that it is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of the offense with which she is charged.
THEREFORE, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's findings as its own, ACCEPTS Defendant's plea of guilty, and ADJUDGES the Defendant, Sylvia Ashley Cooper, guilty as charged in Count One of the Indictment.
ORDERED this 23rd day of March 2015.
/s/ _________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE