REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MARK L. HORNSBY, Magistrate Judge.

Upon the request of the District Judge, and with the written and oral consent of Defendant, this matter came before the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge on January 26, 2018, for administration of a felony guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant was present with counsel, Betty Marak.

After the hearing, it is the finding of the undersigned that: (1) Defendant is fully competent to enter this guilty plea; (2) the plea agreement was properly signed and filed;

(3) Defendant's guilty plea to Count 1 of the Indictment was freely and voluntarily entered, with a full understanding of the nature of the charge and the maximum penalties; (4) Defendant made a knowing and voluntary waiver of the right to a jury trial with the full assistance of counsel; (5) the guilty plea is fully supported by the written factual basis for each of the essential elements of the offense; and (6) the plea agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties; there are no side agreements between the parties.

Accordingly,

IT IS RECOMMENDED that the District Judge accept the guilty plea of Defendant in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement filed in the record of these proceedings, and that Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 1 of the Indictment.

Objections

Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2), parties aggrieved by this recommendation have fourteen (14) days from the date of this Report and Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court, unless an extension of time is granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b). A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days from the filing of the objections. Counsel are directed to furnish a paper courtesy copy of any objections or responses to the District Judge at the time of filing.

A party's failure to file timely written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation set forth above shall bar that 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. See Douglass v. U.S.A.A., 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).