From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Renteria

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2019
CAUSE NO.: 2:19-CR-52-TLS-JPK (N.D. Ind. Oct. 25, 2019)

Opinion

CAUSE NO.: 2:19-CR-52-TLS-JPK

10-25-2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. ADRIAN RENTERIA, Defendant.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE UPON PLEAS OF GUILTY BY DEFENDANT ADRIAN RENTERIA TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, CHIEF JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant's request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joshua P. Kolar, on October 25, 2019, with the written consent of Defendant, counsel for Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant's plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant under oath on the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is offered;

(2) that Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the sentencing guidelines apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is not the result of force or threats or of promises;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant's plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Defendant's plea of guilty and that Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 1 of the Indictment and have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and Recommendation be accepted and Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled before Chief Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen days. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

So ORDERED this 25th day of October, 2019.

s/ Joshua P. Kolar

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOSHUA P. KOLAR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT cc: Honorable Theresa L. Springmann


Summaries of

United States v. Renteria

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2019
CAUSE NO.: 2:19-CR-52-TLS-JPK (N.D. Ind. Oct. 25, 2019)
Case details for

United States v. Renteria

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. ADRIAN RENTERIA, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

Date published: Oct 25, 2019

Citations

CAUSE NO.: 2:19-CR-52-TLS-JPK (N.D. Ind. Oct. 25, 2019)