Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Jeffrey Schoon

December 20, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JEFFREY SCHOON,
DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Leonard T. Strand Magistrate Judge United States District Court

CONCERNING PLEAS OF GUILTY

RULE 11(c)(1)(C) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On December 20, 2012, the above-named defendant, by consent, appeared before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, and entered pleas of guilty to Counts One, Two, Five, Six, Seven and Eight of the Indictment. After cautioning and examining the defendant under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, the court determined that the guilty pleas were knowledgeable and voluntary, and the offenses charged were supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of the offenses charged in Counts One, Two, Five, Six, Seven and Eight of the Indictment. The court therefore RECOMMENDS that the pleas of guilty be accepted and the defendant be adjudged guilty.

At the commencement of the Rule 11 proceeding, the defendant was placed under oath and advised that if he answered any questions falsely, he could be prosecuted for perjury or for making a false statement. He also was advised that in any such prosecution, the Government could use against him any statements he made under oath.

The court then asked a number of questions to ensure the defendant's mental capacity to enter a plea. The defendant stated his full name, his age, and the extent of his schooling. The court inquired into his history of mental illness and addiction to narcotic drugs. The court further inquired into whether the defendant was under the influence of any drug, medication, or alcoholic beverage at the time of the plea hearing. From this inquiry, the court determined that the defendant was not suffering from any mental disability that would impair his ability to make knowing, intelligent, and voluntary pleas of guilty to the charges.

The defendant acknowledged that he had received a copy of the Indictment, and he had fully discussed these charges with his attorney.

The court summarized the charges against the defendant, and listed the elements of the crimes. The court determined that the defendant understood each and every element of the charges, ascertained that the defendant's counsel had explained each and every element of the charges fully to the defendant, and the defendant's counsel confirmed that the defendant understood each and every element of the charges.

The court then elicited a full and complete factual basis for all elements of the crimes charged in Counts One, Two, Five, Six, Seven and Eight of the Indictment.

The court advised the defendant of the consequences of his pleas, including, for each Count, the maximum fine and the maximum term of imprisonment.

With respect to Count One, the defendant was advised that the maximum fine is $250,000; the maximum term of imprisonment is five years; and the maximum period of supervised release is three years.

With respect to Count Two, the defendant was advised that the maximum fine is $250,000; the maximum term of imprisonment is life; and the maximum period of supervised release is five years.

With respect to Counts Five, Six, Seven and Eight, the defendant was advised that as to each count the maximum fine is $250,000; the maximum term of imprisonment is 20 years; and the maximum period of supervised release is three years.

Count Three will be dismissed at sentencing.

The court advised the defendant that he was pleading guilty under a plea agreement with the Government that provided for the imposition of a specific, agreed sentence at the time of the sentencing hearing. After confirming that a copy of the written plea agreement was in front of the defendant and his attorney, the court determined that the defendant understood the terms of the plea agreement. The court explained to the defendant that at the sentencing hearing, the district judge would consider whether or not to accept the plea agreement and impose the agreed sentence. If the district judge decided to accept the plea agreement and impose the agreed sentence, then the defendant would receive the agreed sentence. If the district judge decided to reject the plea agreement and impose a different sentence, then the defendant would have an opportunity to withdraw his pleas of guilty and plead not guilty. The court further advised the defendant that pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, which provided that he was pleading guilty pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, he would be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 15 years. The court explained to the defendant that if ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.