U.S. v. OSBORNE

Case No. 1:17-cr-00087.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. NATHAN ERIC OSBORNE, Defendant.

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Nathan Eric Osborne, defendant, represented by David Kaczor , Federal Public Defender.

Kailee Marie Perez, defendant, represented by Michael Robert Bartish , Springstead & Bartish Law PLLC.

USA, Plaintiff, represented by Alexis M. Sanford , U.S. Attorney.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

ELLEN S. CARMODY, Magistrate Judge.

Pursuant to W.D. Mich. L.Cr.R. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on June 27, 2017, after receiving the written consent of defendant and all counsel. At the hearing, defendant Nathan Eric Osborne entered a plea of guilty to Counts Two and Six of the Superseding Indictment in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the written plea agreement. In Count Two of the Superseding Indictment, defendant is charged with sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e). In Count Six of the Superseding Indictment, defendant is charged with distribution of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A) and (b)(1). On the basis of the record made at the hearing, I find that defendant is fully capable and competent to enter an informed plea; that the plea is made knowingly and with full understanding of each of the rights waived by defendant; that it is made voluntarily and free from any force, threats, or promises, apart from the promises in the plea agreement; that the defendant understands the nature of the charge and penalties provided by law; and that the plea has a sufficient basis in fact.

I therefore recommend that defendant's plea of guilty to Counts Two and Six of the Superseding Indictment be accepted, that the court adjudicate defendant guilty, and that the written plea agreement be considered for acceptance at the time of sentencing. Acceptance of the plea, adjudication of guilt, acceptance of the plea agreement, and imposition of sentence are specifically reserved for the district judge.

OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of Court within 14 days of the date of service of this notice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Failure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court's order. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).


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