U.S. v. FLORES-LOZANO

Case No. 3:17-cr-00049.

United States Of America, Plaintiff, v. Christian Eduardo Flores-Lozano, Defendant.

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division, Dayton.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Christian Eduardo Flores Lozano, Defendant, represented by Daniel Joseph O'Brien , O'Brien Law Offices.

USA, Plaintiff, represented by Dominick S. Gerace, II , United States Attorney's Office.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION1

SHARON L. OVINGTON, Magistrate Judge.

This case came before the Court for a plea hearing on June 9, 2017. Assistant United States Attorney Dominic S. Gerace appeared and represented the Government, and Daniel Joseph O'Brien appeared and represented Defendant. Defendant was present with counsel.

Prior to the hearing, the parties entered into a proposed binding plea agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C), which agreement has been filed of record. (Doc. #24). Under the terms of the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to plead guilty as charged in the Indictment currently pending against him, which charges him with knowingly and intentionally possessing with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, a Schedule I controlled substance, and a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C).

During the plea hearing, the undersigned had the opportunity to address Defendant in open court and to inform Defendant of all rights and privileges as set forth in Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1). Further, the undersigned carefully inquired of Defendant regarding his understanding of the agreement, as well as his competence to understand the agreement. Having fully inquired, the undersigned Judicial Officer finds that Defendant's tendered plea of guilty as charged in the Indictment was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Additionally, based upon the statement of facts, which were read into the record and affirmed by Defendant, the undersigned finds that there is a sufficient factual basis for finding that Defendant is in fact guilty of knowingly and intentionally possessing with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, a Schedule I controlled substance, and a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C).

Based upon the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that the District Court accept Defendant's plea of guilty as charged in the Indictment currently pending against him and find him guilty as charged of knowingly and intentionally possessing with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, a Schedule I controlled substance, and a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C). It is further RECOMMENDED that the District Court defer acceptance of the proposed binding plea agreement until it has the opportunity to review the pre-sentence investigation report (PSR).

Pending the Court's acceptance of Defendant's guilty plea, Defendant has been referred to the Probation Department for a pre-sentence investigation and preparation of the PSR.

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS

Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN days after being served with this Report and Recommendations. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections within FOURTEEN days after being served with a copy thereof.

Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

FootNotes


1. Attached is a NOTICE to the parties regarding objections to this Report and Recommendations.

Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases