United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Central Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING PLEA OF
Williams Chief United States Magistrate Judge.
2, 2017, the above-named defendant, Bradley Loren Fransen, by
consent (Doc. 16), appeared before the undersigned United
States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 11, and entered pleas of guilty to Counts 1 and 2
of the Indictment (Doc. 2). 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.
The court therefore RECOMMENDS that the pleas of guilty be
accepted and the defendant be adjudged guilty.
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.
court 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 the defendant's
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
defendant acknowledged that he had received a copy of the
Indictment, and he had fully discussed these charges with his
court determined that the defendant was pleading guilty under
a plea agreement with the Government. 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 summarized the plea agreement, and made certain the
defendant understood its terms.
court explained to the defendant that because he was pleading
guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, a presentence report
would be prepared and a district judge would consider whether
or not to accept the plea agreement. If the district judge
decided to reject the plea agreement, then the defendant
would have an opportunity to withdraw his pleas of guilty and
change them to not guilty.
defendant was advised also that after his pleas were
accepted, he would have no right to withdraw the pleas at a
later date, even if the sentence imposed was different from
what the defendant or his counsel anticipated.
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
crimes, and the defendant's counsel confirmed that the
defendant understood each and every element of the crimes
court elicited a full and complete factual basis for all
elements of the crimes charged in each Count of the
Indictment to which the defendant was pleading guilty.
court advised the defendant of the consequences of his pleas,
including, for each Count, the maximum fine, the maximum term
of imprisonment, the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment,
and terms of supervised release.
respect to Count 1, the defendant was advised that the
maximum fine is $10, 000, 000; the maximum term of
imprisonment is life; the mandatory minimum term of
imprisonment is 10 years; the maximum period of supervised
release is life; and the minimum period of supervised release
is 5 years.
respect to Count 2, the defendant was advised that the
maximum fine is $250, 000; the maximum term of imprisonment
is life; the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment is 5
years, consecutive to any term of imprisonment imposed on
Count 1; and the maximum period of supervised release is 5
defendant was advised that in aggregate his maximum penalties
for Counts 1 and 2 equal: the maximum fine is $10, 250, 000;
the maximum term of imprisonment is life; the mandatory
minimum term of imprisonment is 15 years; the maximum period