1:26-cr-00035•USA v. Echols, et al
Testo completo
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LUE CHANEL WILLIAMS, Defendant. ________________________________/ Hon. Jane M. Beckering Case No. 1:26-cr-35 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to W.D.Mich. LCrR. 11.1, I conducted a plea hearing in the captioned case on May 26, 2026, after receiving consent of defendant and all counsel in writing and on the record. At the hearing, defendant Lue Chanel Williams entered a plea of guilty to Count 12 of the Indictment in exchange for the undertakings made by the government in the written plea agreement. In Count 12 of the Indictment, defendant is charged with conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). 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 12 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 1:26-cr-00035-JMB ECF No. 107, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/26/26 Page 1 of 2
2 acceptance of the plea agreement, and imposition of sentence are specifically reserved for the district judge. Dated: May 26, 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 1:26-cr-00035-JMB ECF No. 107, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/26/26 Page 2 of 2
Ti chiedi come si applica questo testo alla tua situazione?
Consulenza gratuita, senza impegno
Descrivi la tua situazione. Il nostro team ti ricontatterà via e-mail per la tua consulenza.
Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.