Report and Recommendation — Maikel Sanchez Garcia
Summary
A report and recommendation in United States v. Maikel Sanchez Garcia, No. 24-CR-3013-LTS-KEM, Document 226, filed 10/28/24, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Central Division. After the defendant consented to proceed before a magistrate judge, the report records that he entered a guilty plea, with counsel present, to Counts 7 and 20 of the Superseding Indictment under a plea agreement that includes an appeal waiver. It lists the Rule 11 advisements given under oath, including the rights waived and the possible penalties. The report recommends that the guilty plea be accepted and that a preliminary forfeiture order be entered. It is dated October 28, 2024 and signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Kelly K.E. Mahoney.
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
- Captured
- 2026-09-30
- Source site
- www-govinfo-gov
Archived web capture. Preserved source — captured from www-govinfo-gov; archived 2026-09-30.
Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, No. 24-CR-3013-LTS-KEM
vs. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MAIKEL SANCHEZ GARCIA,
Defendant.
____________________
After consenting to proceed before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge,
Defendant, together with counsel and in the presence of counsel for the Government,
appeared before me to enter a guilty plea to Counts 7 and 20 of the:
☐ Indictment ☒ Superseding Indictment ☐ Information.
Defendant entered a plea ☐ without a plea agreement, or ☒ pursuant to a plea
agreement that includes: ☒ the dismissal of charges, ☒ an appeal waiver, ☐ a conditional
plea preserving the right to appeal certain rulings under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11(a)(1), ☐ a nonbinding agreement under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11(c)(1)(B), ☐ specific sentencing terms under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11(c)(1)(C).
I cautioned and examined Defendant under oath and in open court as required by
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, including: (1) that the Government could use
Defendant’s statements made under oath in a prosecution for perjury or false statement; (2)
the right to plead not guilty and persist in that plea; (3) the right to counsel; (4) the right to
a jury trial, to confront witnesses, to present a defense and compel witnesses, and to remain
silent; (5) that trial rights would be forever waived by pleading guilty; (6) the nature of
each charge to which Defendant is pleading; (7) the possible penalties that may be imposed,
including the maximum and any mandatory minimum penalties and a special assessment;
(8) the operation of the sentencing guidelines; and (9) all collateral consequences that could
Case 3:24-cr-03013-LTS-KEM Document 226 Filed 10/28/24 Page 1 of 3
follow a conviction, including but not limited to, any applicable forfeiture and restitution,
the absence of parole in the federal court system, the loss citizenship rights, the nature and
possible length of any term of supervised release, as well as possible immigration
consequences (if applicable). When applicable, I also made a record of any written plea
agreement, the dismissal of any charges, any appeal waiver, any conditional nature of the
plea, and any specific sentencing terms under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11(c)(1)(C).
Defendant was given a full opportunity to address the court and ask questions.
Counsel for the Government and for Defendant were given the opportunity to make any
additional record, raise issues with the validity of the plea proceeding, and assert any legal
reason why the plea should not be accepted. Defense counsel acknowledged that the
change of plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, that there was a factual basis for
the change of plea, and that the plea was valid.
Based on my observations and the record made, I find that: (1) Defendant is
competent and the decision to plead guilty was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary and not
the product of any force, pressure, threat, or promises, except as may be contained in a
written plea agreement; (2) the change of plea is supported by an independent factual basis
for each of the essential elements; (3) the provisions of Rule 11 and any other provisions
of the law governing submission of guilty pleas have been complied with; (4) any plea
agreement is in writing, was disclosed and discussed during the plea hearing, and will be
filed in the court file; and (5) there are no agreements or stipulations other than contained
in a written plea agreement.
I therefore RECOMMEND that the District Court Judge ACCEPT the defendant’s
change of plea and adjudge the defendant guilty.
Presentence Investigation
I ordered a presentence investigation be conducted by United States Probation.
2
Case 3:24-cr-03013-LTS-KEM Document 226 Filed 10/28/24 Page 2 of 3
Forfeiture
☐ Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(1), I find that the
Government has established the requisite nexus between Defendant’s offense
and the property described in the charging document’s forfeiture allegation.
I recommend the District Court Judge enter a preliminary forfeiture order
pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2).
Release/Detention
☐ Defendant will remain detained pending sentencing.
☒ Defendant will remain released pending sentencing: ☒ pursuant to the
Court’s prior order, or ☐ on an Appearance Bond and Order Setting
Conditions of Release (filed separately).
☐ Defendant was ordered to the custody of the United States Marshals Service
to be detained pending sentencing for the reasons stated on the record.
Objections
☒ The parties must file any objections to the findings and my recommendation
no later than 14 days from the filing of this Report and Recommendation. If
no objections are made, the District Court Judge may accept Defendant’s
guilty plea by simply entering a written order doing so.
☐ The parties waived their rights to file objections to this Report and
Recommendation and agree that the District Court Judge may accept
Defendant’s change of plea.
DATED October 28, 2024.
Kelly K.E. Mahoney
Chief Magistrate Judge
Northern District of Iowa
3
Case 3:24-cr-03013-LTS-KEM Document 226 Filed 10/28/24 Page 3 of 3
File and source
- File
- uscourts-iand-3-24-cr-03013-8-pdf_84e3002273f5cb6f.pdf
- Size
- 250,467 bytes
- SHA-256
- d03335a4aadba10dd1a20c114bc4ead091065039f086ffb53d93e337d83d2460
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov