Memorandum and Recommendation — United States v. Leticia Arceneaux (Western District of Texas, Document 18)

Summary

Memorandum and Recommendation, Document 18, filed 04/24/25, in Case 5:25-cr-00172-XR, Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, concerning Leticia Arceneaux. It states that the defendant appeared before the magistrate judge on April 24, 2025 to enter a plea of guilty, and that the magistrate judge admonished the defendant on the nature of the charge, the possible penalties, and the consequences of pleading guilty. The magistrate judge finds that the defendant is competent to stand trial, has consented to plead guilty before a magistrate judge, understands the charge and the penalties, and that there is a factual basis for the plea. It recommends that the guilty plea be ACCEPTED and that a judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant.

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

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 5:25-cr-00172-XR Document18 - Filed 04/24/25 Page1of2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
USA §
§
Vs. § Criminal No.: SA:25-CR-00172(1)-XR
§
(1) Leticia Arceneaux §

Defendant
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to the referral by the district judge, the defendant, defendant's attorney and
the attorney for the government appeared before the undersigned magistrate judge on April 24,
2025, for the purpose of defendant's entry of a plea of guilty. At that time defendant entered a
guilty plea as stated in the record. The magistrate judge addressed the defendant personally in
open court and, after assuring that defendant was competent to proceed and had consented to
pleading guilty before a magistrate judge, admonished the defendant in accordance with Rule 11,
Fed.R.Crim.P., of the nature of the charge, the possible penalties, defendant's constitutional and
statutory rights, and the consequences of pleading guilty. Defendant acknowledged
understanding these admonishments. The undersigned also addressed defendant concerning the
voluntariness of the guilty plea. Finally, the undersigned assured the existence of a factual basis
for the guilty plea. Based upon the answers to the court's questions from defendant and from
counsel, the magistrate judge makes the following findings:

1. the defendant is competent to stand trial;

2 the defendant has consented to plead guilty before a magistrate judge;

3. the defendant fully understands the nature of the charge and the penalties;

4 the defendant understands defendant's constitutional and statutory rights and

desires to waive them;

the defendant's plea is freely, knowingly and voluntarily made; and

6. there is a factual basis for the plea.
RECOMMENDATION

It is, therefore, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that the guilty plea be
ACCEPTED and that a judgment of guilt be entered against defendant.

REVISED 12/09
Case 5:25-cr-00172-XR Document18 - Filed 04/24/25 Page 2 of 2

Instructions for Service and
Notice of Right to Appeal / Object

The United States District Clerk shall serve a copy of this Memorandum and
Recommendation on all parties either (1) electronic transmittal to all parties represented by an
attorney registered as a Filing User with the Clerk of Court pursuant to the Court's Procedural
Rules for Electronic Filing in Civil and Criminal Cases; or (2) by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to any party not represented by an attorney registered as a Filing User. Pursuant to
Title 28 U.S.C. Section 636 (b) (1) and Rule 59(b)(2), Fed.R.Crim.P., any party who desires to
object to this report must serve and file written objections to the Memorandum and
Recommendation within 14 days after being served with a copy unless this time period is
modified by the district court. A party filing objections must specifically identify those findings,
conclusions or recommendations to which objections are being made and the basis for such
objections; the district court need not consider frivolous, conclusory or general objections. Such
party shall file the objections with the clerk of court, and serve the objections on all other
parties and the magistrate judge. A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed
findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall bar the party from a de
novo determination by the district court. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 106 S.Ct. 466,
472, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Additionally, any failure to file written objections to the proposed
findings, conclusions and recommendation contained in this Memorandum and Recommendation
within 14 days after being served with a copy shall bar the aggrieved party, except upon grounds
of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal
conclusions accepted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile
Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (Sth Cir. 1996).

ITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

SIGNED April 24, 2025.

REVISED 12/09


File and source

File

18.pdf

Size

128,988 bytes

SHA-256

5616b85e4df30b4b46fe509ba73188f03d771dfbbe6a56fdb16e368eb6b973ff

Our copy

18.pdf

Original

No public link identified.