REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGE OF PLEA

ALICIA M. OTAZO-REYES, Magistrate Judge.

THIS CAUSE came before the undersigned by Order of Reference from United States District Judge Jose E. Martinez and the consent of the parties for the acceptance by a United States Magistrate Judge of a guilty plea by Defendant Alvaro Valdez ("Valdez"). Pursuant to such reference the undersigned conducted a change of plea hearing on April 16, 2019, which was attended by Valdez, his attorney, Michael Gelety, and Francis Viamontes, Assistant United States Attorney. The undersigned hereby advises as follows:

1. At the commencement of the change of plea proceedings, the undersigned advised Valdez that he had a right to have these proceedings conducted by the United States District Judge assigned to this case. Valdez was advised that a Magistrate Judge was conducting these proceedings by Order of Reference from the District Judge. The undersigned confirmed that Valdez, his attorney, and the Assistant United States Attorney to whom this cause is assigned, consented to the undersigned conducting these proceedings. The undersigned advised Valdez that, the sentence will be imposed by the District Judge, who will make all findings and rulings regarding such sentence and will conduct a sentencing hearing at a time to be scheduled by the District Judge.

2. The undersigned then conducted a plea colloquy with Valdez consistent with the outline set forth in the Bench Book for U.S. District Court Judges and in conformity with the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

3. The undersigned advised Valdez of the sentence possibilities as to Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Information to which he was tendering a guilty plea, as well as the possible fines and terms of supervised release. Valdez was advised that Count 1 charged in the Superseding Information to which he was pleading guilty carries a maximum term of life imprisonment, followed by a term of supervised release of at least 5 years and up to life. Valdez was advised that Count 2 charged in the Superseding Information to which he was pleading guilty carries a minimum term of 5 years' imprisonment and a maximum term of 20 years' imprisonment, followed by a term of supervised release of at least 5 years and up to life. Additionally, the District Judge may impose a fine of up to $250,000.00 for each count, and there is a mandatory special assessment of $100.00 for each count. Valdez was also advised that the court may order restitution as to each count.

4. Valdez acknowledged that he was fully satisfied with the services of his attorney and that he had a full opportunity to discuss all facets of his case with his attorney, which he acknowledged that he understood.

5. Valdez pled guilty to Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Information, namely, conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1594(c); and distribution of child pornography, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1).

6. The government submitted a factual proffer for the guilty plea which consisted of all of the essential elements of the offenses to which Valdez pled guilty.

7. Valdez was informed that a Pre-Sentence Investigation Report will be ordered by the District Judge. Valdez will remain in pre-trial detention pending imposition of sentence. The sentencing hearing will be conducted by the District Judge at a time to be scheduled by the District Judge.

Accordingly, and based upon the foregoing and the plea colloquy conducted in this Cause, the undersigned hereby

RECOMMENDS that Valdez be found to have freely and voluntarily entered his guilty plea to Counts 1 and 3 of the Superseding Information, that his guilty plea be accepted, that he be adjudicated guilty of such offenses, and that a sentencing hearing as scheduled by the District Judge be conducted for a final disposition of this Cause.

Pursuant to Local Magistrate Judge Rule 4(b), the parties have fourteen days from the date of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections, if any, with the Honorable Jose E. Martinez, United States District Judge. Failure to file timely objections may bar the parties from attacking the factual findings contained herein on appeal. See Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). Further, "failure to object in accordance with the provisions of [28 U.S.C.] § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions." See 11th Cir. R. 3-1 (I.O.P.-3).