Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
United States v. Jackson
United States District Court, D. Colorado
February 20, 2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
1. GARRYN JACKSON, Defendant.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON THE ENTRY
OF A PLEA OF GUILTY
Robert
E. Blackburn United States District Judge
On
February 20, 2019, I conducted a change of plea hearing
during which (1) the defendant, his counsel, counsel for the
government, and I formally reviewed and considered the plea
agreement of the parties as stated in Court's Exhibits 1
and 2 (“plea agreement”); (2) I rearraigned the
defendant under Fed. R. Crim. P. 10; and (3) I formally
advised the defendant and conducted providency proceedings
under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11.
Based
upon my exchange and colloquy with the defendant under oath
in open court on the record; based upon the representations,
remarks, and statements of counsel for the government and
counsel for the defendant; based upon my review of the file
and my review of the written plea agreement as stated in
Court's Exhibits 1 and 2, I enter the following findings
of fact and conclusions of law:
That the defendant appeared to be alert and not under the
influence of or impaired by drugs, narcotics, marihuana,
alcohol, medication, or intoxicants;
That the defendant was competent and fully understood the
nature, circumstances, and essential elements of the offenses
to which his pleas of guilty were entered;
That the defendant understands clearly that the government
has the right in a prosecution for perjury or false statement
to use against the defendant any statement that the defendant
gives under oath;
That the defendant understood the direct and collateral
consequences that he may suffer or experience as a result of
his participation in the plea agreement, his pleas of guilty,
and the resultant felony convictions and sentences;
That the defendant's pleas of guilty and admission of the
forfeiture allegation in the Indictment were made and entered
voluntarily, knowingly, intelligently and intentionally, and
were not the result of mistake; misunderstanding, fear,
force, threats, coercion, or undue influence by anyone;
That the defendant's pleas of guilty and admission of the
forfeiture allegation were not the result of any promise or
inducement made by anyone, including legal counsel, except as
stated expressly in the original of Court's Exhibit 1,
concerning the right of the defendant to appeal my order
[#54] denying his motion to suppress;
That the defendant understood each of his legal rights,
including the rights enumerated at Fed. R. Crim. P.
11(b)(1)(B)and (E), and his right to a trial by jury and his
right to be represented throughout this criminal case by an
attorney even if indigent; and that the defendant freely,
voluntarily, knowingly, intelligently, and intentionally
waived his rights and privileges, including the right to
trial by jury and except as limited expressly by the plea
agreement, his right to appeal or to collaterally attack the
prosecution, conviction, and/or sentence; however, the
defendant did not waive his right to be represented
throughout this criminal case by an attorney even if
indigent;
That the defendant understood the maximum possible penalties,
including imprisonment, fine, and term of supervised release;
That the defendant understood that in imposing sentence, I
must consult and consider the purposes and goals of
sentencing as prescribed by Congress, the relevant provisions
of the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines, any
motion for a sentence departure or variance, and the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(1)-(7); and the
defendant clearly understood that regardless of the sentence
I impose, he may not withdraw his pleas of guilty on that
basis;
That the defendant understood that the court will not be
bound by any representations by anyone concerning the penalty
to be imposed;
That a factual basis existed to support and sustain the plea
agreement and the defendant's pleas of guilty and
...