USA v. Gant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 1:25-cr-00044
Plaintiff,
v. 	Hon. Robert J. Jonker
CARLTON GANT, III,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to W.D. Mich. LCrR 11.1 and upon a request of the district court, I
conducted a felony plea hearing in this matter on February 5, 2026, after receiving the written
consent of the defendant, the defendant’s attorney and the attorney for the government. These
consents were also placed on the record in open court.
Defendant Carlton Gant, III, is charged in a Superseding Felony Information with
possession of a machine gun. On the basis of the record made at the hearing, I found that
defendant was competent to enter a plea of guilty and that the plea was knowledgeable and
voluntary with a full understanding of each of the rights waived by the defendant, that the
defendant fully understood the nature of the charge and the consequences of the plea, and that
the defendant’s plea had a sufficient basis in fact which contained all of the elements of the
offense charged.
I also inquired into the plea agreement. I found the plea agreement to have been
knowingly and voluntarily made and found that it fully reflected all of the promises by the
parties.
Case 1:25-cr-00044-RJJ ECF No. 46, PageID.<pageID> Filed 02/05/26 Page 1 of 2

Accordingly, I accepted the plea of guilty, subject to final acceptance of the plea
by the District Judge, and I specifically reserved acceptance of the plea agreement for the District
Judge. I ordered the preparation of a presentence investigation report.
Recommendation
Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully recommend that the defendant’s plea of
guilty to the Superseding Felony Information be accepted, that the court adjudicate the defendant
guilty of that charge, and that the written plea agreement be accepted at, or before, the time of
sentencing.
Dated: February 5, 2026 	/s/ Ray Kent
RAY KENT
United Sates Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO PARTIES
You have the right to de novo review by the district judge of the foregoing
findings. Any application for review must be in writing, must specify the portions of the
findings or proceedings objected to, and must be filed and served no later than fourteen (14) days
after the plea hearing. See W.D. Mich. LcrR 11.1(b). A failure to file timely objections may
result in the waiver of any further right to seek appellate review of the plea-taking procedure.
See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Neuman v. Rivers, 125 F.3d 315, 322-23 (6 th Cir.), cert.
denied, 522 U.S. 1030 (1997); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case 1:25-cr-00044-RJJ ECF No. 46, PageID.<pageID> Filed 02/05/26 Page 2 of 2