USA v. Sanderson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 25-CR-51 CJW-MAR
Plaintiff,
vs. ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
CONCERNING DEFENDANT’S
GUILTY PLEA
DAWSON SANDERSON,
Defendant.
____________________
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On June 25, 2025, a six-count Indictment was filed against defendant. On
November 13, 2025, defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Mark A.
Roberts and entered a plea of guilty to counts 1 & 5 of the Indictment. The plea was
made pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement meaning that it would be binding on
the Court if accepted. On November 13, 2025, Judge Roberts filed a Report and
Recommendation in which he recommended that defendant’s guilty plea be accepted.
The parties did not file objections to Judge Roberts’ Report and Recommendation. The
Court, therefore, undertakes the necessary review of Judge Roberts’ recommendation to
accept defendant’s plea in this case.
II. ANALYSIS
Pursuant to statute, this Court’s standard of review for a magistrate judge’s report
and recommendation 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).
Where parties make no objections to a magistrate’s report and recommendation,
Case 1:25-cr-00051-CJW-MAR Document 28 Filed 12/01/25 Page 1 of 2

2
the Court reviews the magistrate’s report and recommendation for clear error. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Similarly, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 59(b) provides
for review of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 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’ Report and Recommendation of November 13, 2025,
and ACCEPTS defendant’s plea of guilty in this case to counts 1 & 5 of the Indictment.
The Court reserves ruling on whether to accept the terms of the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea
agreement until after the completion of the Presentence Report and the sentencing
hearing. If, at the time of sentencing, the Court does not accept the terms of the plea
agreement, defendant will be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of December, 2025.
___________________________
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 1:25-cr-00051-CJW-MAR Document 28 Filed 12/01/25 Page 2 of 2