USA v. Trawick et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 25-CR-1042 CJW-MAR
Plaintiff,
vs. ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
CONCERNING DEFENDANT’S
GUILTY PLEA
DONTA RACINE EUELLS,
Defendant.
__________________________
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On December 2, 2025, a two-count Superseding Indictment was filed against
defendant and one other person. Defendant was charged in count 2. On January 12,
2026, defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Roberts and
entered a plea of guilty to count 2 of the Superseding Indictment. On January 12, 2026,
Judge Roberts filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommended
defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The parties did not file objections to Judge Roberts’
R&R. The Court, therefore, undertakes the necessary review of Judge Roberts’
recommendation to accept defendant’s plea in this case.
II. ANALYSIS
Under the statute, this Court’s standard of review for a magistrate judge’s R&R is
as follows:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions
of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate
judge.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
When parties do not object to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation,
the Court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. 28 U.S.C. §
Case 2:25-cr-01042-CJW-MAR Document 47 Filed 01/27/26 Page 1 of 2

2
636(b)(1)(A). Similarly, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 59(b) provides for review
of a magistrate judge’s R&R on dispositive motions, where objections are made, as
follows:
The district judge must consider de novo any objection to the magistrate
judge’s recommendation. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify
the recommendation, receive further evidence, or resubmit the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.
FED. R. CRIM. P. 59(b)(3).1
In this case, the parties filed no objections, and it appears to the Court upon review
that Judge Roberts’ findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Therefore, the
Court ACCEPTS Judge Roberts’ R&R of January 12, 2026, and ACCEPTS defendant’s
plea of guilty in this case to count 2 of the Superseding Indictment.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 27th day of January, 2026.
_________________________
C.J. Williams, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa
1 United States v. Cortez-Hernandez, 673 F. App’x 587, 590-91 (8th Cir. 2016) (per curiam),
suggests that a defendant may have the right to de novo review of a magistrate judge’s
recommendation to accept a plea of guilty even if no objection is filed.
Case 2:25-cr-01042-CJW-MAR Document 47 Filed 01/27/26 Page 2 of 2