1:25-cr-00123•USA v. Valentine, Jr
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. COREY TIWONE VALENTINE, JR., Defendant. ________________________________/ Hon. Jane M. Beckering Case No. 1:25-cr-123 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to W.D.Mich. LCrR. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on March 27, 2026, after receiving consent of defendant and all counsel in writing and on the record. At the hearing, defendant Corey Tiwone Valentine, Jr. entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 of the Indictment in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the written plea agreement. In Count 2 of the Indictment, defendant is charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(vi). 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 2 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-00123-JMB ECF No. 36, PageID.<pageID> Filed 03/27/26 Page 1 of 2
2 acceptance of the plea agreement, and imposition of sentence are specifically reserved for the district judge. Dated: March 27, 2026 /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-00123-JMB ECF No. 36, PageID.<pageID> Filed 03/27/26 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.