United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Eastern Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
WILLIAMS, CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
September 5, 2017, the above-named defendant Donald Joseph
Boyce, by consent (Doc. 34), appeared before the undersigned
United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 11, and entered a plea of guilty to Count
One of the Information (Doc. 32). After cautioning and
examining the defendant under oath concerning each of the
subjects mentioned in Rule 11, the court determined that the
guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary, and the offense
charged was supported by an independent basis in fact
containing each of the essential elements of the offense. The
court therefore RECOMMENDS that the plea 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
Information, and he had fully discussed these charges with
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 the plea
agreement provided for dismissal of charges if he pleaded
guilty, 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.
court explained to the defendant that if he pleaded guilty, 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 plea was accepted,
he would have no right to withdraw the plea at a later date,
even if the sentence imposed was different from what the
defendant or his counsel anticipated.
court summarized the charge against the defendant, and listed
the elements of the crime. The court determined that the
defendant understood each and every element of the crime,
ascertained that his counsel had explained each and every
element of the crime fully to him, and the defendant's
counsel confirmed that the defendant understood each and
every element of the crime charged.
court elicited a full and complete factual basis for all
elements of the crimes charged in each Count of the
Information to which the defendant was pleading guilty.
court advised the defendant of the consequences of his plea,
including the maximum fine, the maximum term of imprisonment,
and the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment, and the
possibility that restitution could be ordered.
respect to Count 1, the defendant was
advised that the maximum fine is $250, 000;
the maximum term of imprisonment is 10
years; and the maximum period of supervised release
is 3 years. The defendant was further
advised that if the court finds defendant has three previous
convictions for a violent felony or serious drug offense, or
both, committed on occasions different from one another, then
the maximum fine is $250, 000; the mandatory
minimum term of imprisonment is 15 years;
the maximum term of imprisonment is life;
and the maximum term of supervised release is 5
defendant also was advised that the court is obligated to
impose a special assessment of $100.00,
which the defendant must pay. The defendant also was advised
of the collateral consequences of a plea of guilty. The