USA v. Innmon

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
United States of America
vs.
Carl David Innmon
§
§
§
§
§
NO. 1:25-CR-00255-RP
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TO: THE HONORABLE ROBERT PITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Magistrate Judge submits this Report and Recommendation to the District Court
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). The defendant, with the advice of his attorney, consented to
enter this guilty plea before this Magistrate Judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the
District Judge.
On January 6, 2026, the defendant and counsel appeared before the Magistrate Judge for the
taking of the defendant’s felony guilty plea and for his allocution pursuant to Rule 11 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Counsel were admonished as required by the Due Process
Protection Act. The undersigned addressed the defendant personally in open court, informed him
of the admonishments under Rule 11, and determined that he understood those admonishments.
The defendant pled guilty to one count of Receipt of Child Pornography, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2) & (b)(1), and one count of Possession of Child Pornography, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) & (b)(2).
The Magistrate Judge finds the following:
1. The defendant fully understands the nature of the charge against him and possible
penalties;
Case 1:25-cr-00255-RP Document 34 Filed 01/06/26 Page 1 of 2

2. The defendant understands his constitutional and statutory rights, understands that his
constitutional and statutory rights can be waived, and understands the meaning and
effect of the waiver of his constitutional and statutory rights;
3. The defendant’s plea was made freely and voluntarily;
4. The defendant is competent to enter this plea of guilty; and
5. There is a factual basis for this plea.
RECOMMENDATION
The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court accept the defendant’s guilty
plea and, after reviewing the presentence investigation report, enter a Final Judgment of guilt
against him.
WARNING
The parties may file objections to this Report and Recommendation. A party filing objections
must specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which objections are being
made. The District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusive, or general objections. See
Battle v. United States Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987). A party’s failure to
file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained within this
Report within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Report shall bar that party
from de novo review by the District Court of the proposed findings and recommendations and,
except on grounds of plain error, shall bar the party from appellate review of proposed factual
findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court to which no objections were filed.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-53, 106 S. Ct. 466, 472-74
(1985); Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
SIGNED on January 6, 2026.
SUSAN HIGHTOWER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:25-cr-00255-RP Document 34 Filed 01/06/26 Page 2 of 2