USA v. Herman et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-CR-1038 CJW-MAR
Plaintiff,
vs.
DAVID ALLEN PARKER,
Defendant.
ORDER REGARDING
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
CONCERINING DEFENDANT’S
GUILTY PLEA
____________________
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On June 26, 2025, a four-count Second Superseding Indictment was filed against
defendant and one other person. Defendant was charged in all four counts. On January
12, 2026, defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Roberts
and entered a plea of guilty to count one of the Second 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).
Case 2:24-cr-01038-CJW-MAR Document 138 Filed 01/27/26 Page 1 of 2

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. §
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 one of the Second 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 2:24-cr-01038-CJW-MAR Document 138 Filed 01/27/26 Page 2 of 2