Opinion
Criminal No. 1:05CR109.
January 25, 2006
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION THAT DEFENDANT'S GUILTY PLEA BE ACCEPTED
On January 9, 2006, defendant, Julious Ceasar Pettis, appeared before United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull and moved this Court for permission to enter a plea of GUILTY to the one count Information. The defendant stated that he understood that the magistrate judge is not a United States District Judge, and consented to pleading before the magistrate judge. This Court had referred the guilty plea to the magistrate judge for the purposes of administering the allocution pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, making a finding as to whether the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered, and recommending to this Court whether the plea should be accepted.
The magistrate judge accepted the defendant's waiver of indictment pursuant to Rule 7(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Since the offense charged in the Information naming the defendant is punishable by a term of imprisonment of greater than one year, the magistrate judge questioned the defendant to determine if his waiver of prosecution by indictment was freely given in a sober and knowledgeable fashion.
The magistrate judge then advised the defendant of the nature of the charges made in the Information, and inquired whether the defendant had read and reviewed the Information with counsel. Defendant waived the reading of the Information.
Next, the magistrate judge summarized the defendant's rights to proceed by a Grand Jury indictment and explained that he has a constitutional right to proceed by an indictment, and that the United States is able to charge him by Information only by waiving this right. The magistrate judge explained the Grand Jury process to the defendant: that to charge him with an offense a Grand Jury must find probable cause that he committed the offense; that the Grand Jury is composed of at least 16 and not more than 23 persons; and that at least 12 of the grand jurors must find that probable cause exists to so charge him.
The defendant stated that he understood that he had a right to proceed by indictment by a Grand Jury, and that by waiving this right, the United States could proceed to charge him with the Information just as though he had been indicted.
The defendant then signed a Waiver of Indictment in open court, and the magistrate judge ordered that the Waiver be filed.
Based upon the defendant's statements during the plea hearing and the testimony of Officer Todd Forbes, the magistrate judge found that the defendant was competent to enter a plea, that the plea was freely and voluntarily given, that the defendant was aware of the nature of the charges against him and the consequences of the charges against him and the consequences of his plea, and that a factual basis existed for the tendered plea.
On January 12, 2006, the magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation, finding a factual basis for the plea and recommending that this Court accept the plea of guilty to the one count Information. On January 20, 2006, the defendant filed a notice stating that he had no objections to the magistrate's judge report and recommendation. Likewise, on January 23, 2006, the Government filed a notice that it had no objections to the report and recommendation.
Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS the plea of GUILTY to the one count Information.
The Court ADJUDGES the defendant GUILTY of the crime charged in the one count Information. Pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e)(2) and U.S.S.G. § 6B1.1(c), acceptance of the proposed plea agreement and stipulated addendum to the plea agreement, is DEFERRED until the Court has received and reviewed the presentence report prepared in this matter.
On January 20, 2006, the defendant filed a motion to consolidate, stating that on November 2, 2005, he had entered a plea of guilty to Count Two of the underlying Indictment in Case No. 1:05CR68, and that the Court subsequently entered an order scheduling the sentencing hearing on that conviction on February 24, 2006. Accordingly, he requested that the present matter and Case No. 1:05CR68 be consolidated for purposes of sentencing. On January 23, 2006, the Government filed a response, stating that it had no objection to the consolidation of the cases for sentencing. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS defendant's motion for consolidation (dkt no. 15).
Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 6A1 et seq., it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Probation Office update its presentence investigation of JULIOUS CEASAR PETTIS and make any revisions to the presentence report prepared in 1:05CR68 for the Court;
2. The Government and the defendant are to provide their versions of the offense to the probation officer by January 27, 2006;
3. The presentence report is to be disclosed to the defendant, defense counsel, and the United States on or before February 3, 2006; however, the Probation Officer is directed not to disclose the sentencing recommendations made pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(b)(6)(A);
4. Counsel shall file WRITTEN OBJECTIONS to the presentence report and may file a SENTENCING MEMORANDUM that evaluates sentencing factors the parties believe to be relevant under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (including the sentencing range under the advisory Guidelines) and explains any proposed sentence, on or before February 10, 2006;
5. The Office of Probation shall submit to the Court the presentence report with addendum on or before February 17, 2006; and
6. Sentencing in this case and in 1:05CR68 will be conducted on February 24, 2006 at 12:15 p.m.
7. Defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.
The Clerk is directed to transmit certified copies of this Order to counsel of record and the defendant.