USA v. Quintero-Herrera, et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN SEBASTIAN QUINTERO-HERRERA,
Defendant.
________________________________/
Hon. Jane M. Beckering
Case No. 1:25-cr-76
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to W.D.Mich. LCrR. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on
October 27, 2025, after receiving consent of defendant and all counsel in writing and on the record.
At the hearing, defendant John Sebastian Quintero-Herrera entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 of
the Superseding Indictment in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the
written plea agreement. In Count 2 of the Superseding Indictment, defendant is charged with
Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314. 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 Superseding
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,
Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMB ECF No. 118, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 1 of
2

2
adjudication of guilt, acceptance of the plea agreement, and imposition of sentence are specifically
reserved for the district judge.
Dated: October 27, 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-00076-JMB ECF No. 118, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 2 of
2