USA v. Ayala et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
EDGIDIO VASQUEZ-MENCHO,
Defendant.
________________________________/
Hon. Paul L. Maloney
Case No. 1:25-cr-136
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to W.D.Mich. LCrR. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on
November 21, 2025, after receiving consent of defendant and all counsel in writing and on the
record. At the hearing, defendant Edgidio Vasquez-Mencho entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of
the Indictment in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the written plea
agreement. In Count 1 of the Indictment, defendant is charged with Conspiracy to Transfer False
Identification Documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(2) and (f). On the basis of the record
made at the hearing, I find that defendant is fully capable and competent to enter an informed plea;
that the plea is made knowingly and with full understanding of each of the rights waived by
defendant; that it is made voluntarily and free from any force, threats, or promises, apart from the
promises in the plea agreement; that the defendant understands the nature of the charge and
penalties provided by law; and that the plea has a sufficient basis in fact.
I therefore recommend that defendant's plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment be
accepted, that the court adjudicate defendant guilty, and that the written plea agreement be
considered for acceptance at the time of sentencing. Acceptance of the plea, adjudication of guilt,
Case 1:25-cr-00136-PLM ECF No. 83, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/21/25 Page 1 of 2

2
acceptance of the plea agreement, and imposition of sentence are specifically reserved for the
district judge.
Dated: November 21, 2025 	/s/ Sally J. Berens
SALLY J. BERENS
U.S. Magistrate Judge
OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of Court
within 14 days of the date of service of this notice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Failure to file
objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case 1:25-cr-00136-PLM ECF No. 83, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/21/25 Page 2 of 2