Order — United States v. Jeffrey Boylett (Dkt. 26)

Summary

An Order entered July 20, 2022, in United States v. Jeffrey Boylett, Case No. 2:21-CR-154 JD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. The order states that no objections were filed to the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation upon a plea of guilty issued on July 5, 2022 [DE 22]. The Court adopts those findings and recommendations, accepts the plea of guilty and the plea agreement, and finds the defendant guilty of Count 1 of the Indictment, for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1343. It also directs how a party must state any objection to the Presentence Report in a sentencing memorandum. The order is signed /s/ Jon E. DeGuilio, Chief Judge.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

 USDC IN/ND case 2:21-cr-00154-JD-JPK document 26 filed 07/20/22 page 1 of 1

                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                             NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
                                  HAMMOND DIVISION

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

        v.                                           Case No. 2:21-CR-154 JD

 JEFFREY BOYLETT


                                             ORDER

       No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation upon

a plea of guilty issued on July 5, 2022 [DE 22]. Accordingly, the Court now ADOPTS those

findings and recommendations, ACCEPTS defendant Jeffrey Boylett’s plea of guilty, ACCEPTS

the plea agreement, and FINDS the defendant guilty of Count 1 of the Indictment, for violating 18

U.S.C. § 1343.

       Any objections a party submits to the probation officer in response to the draft Presentence

Report must specifically identify the basis of the objection and any supporting authority. Should

the Addendum to the Final Presentence Report reflect any outstanding objections by a party, that

party must specifically state in its sentencing memorandum whether it maintains that objection. If

so, the party must identify the basis and authority for its objection and, where applicable, any

evidence the party expects to offer in support of that objection. The party should also state if,

consistent with Rule 32(i)(3)(B), it does not believe a ruling on that objection will be necessary.

       SO ORDERED.

       ENTERED: July 20, 2022



                                                      /s/ JON E. DEGUILIO
                                              Chief Judge
                                              United States District Court


File and source

File

26.pdf

Size

93,031 bytes

SHA-256

b2910c3c548f409c37c921d94f09cb3ad619b49ec122330cb6c50e99815a3529

Our copy

26.pdf

Original

No public link identified.