United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
A. FABER, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Charleston, on March 26, 2019, came the defendant, Stalins
Anthony Simon, in person and by counsel, W. Jesse Forbes,
Esquire, and came the United States by Andrew J. Tessman,
Assistant United States Attorney, for the purpose of
considering the defendant's plea of guilty to the one
count Information charging him with possession with intent to
distribute a quantity of heroin, in violation of Title 21,
United States Code, Section 841(a)(1). Dylan Shaffer and
Michele Wentz, U.S. Probation Officers, appeared on behalf of
the United States Probation Department.
court inquired of the defendant, addressing him personally
and by counsel, to determine the competency of the defendant
to proceed. The court found the defendant competent.
Assistant United States Attorney then offered for the
court's consideration and summarized the entirety of a
written plea agreement signed by both the defendant and his
counsel, which signatures the defendant and his counsel
acknowledged in court.
court informed the defendant of the maximum penalties to
which he will be exposed by virtue of his plea of guilty and
defendant acknowledged his understanding of the same.
court next inquired as to the defendant's plea and the
defendant responded that he intended to plead guilty. The
court explained the range of penalties to which the defendant
would be exposed by virtue of his guilty plea. The court also
explained the statute under which this action is prosecuted
and the elements which the United States would have had to
prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, had the matter been tried.
The Assistant United States Attorney then stated the factual
basis establishing that the defendant committed the offense
to which he was pleading guilty. The defendant admitted that
the factual basis as stated was substantially true.
court informed the defendant of his right to be prosecuted by
indictment pursuant to Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure. Having been informed of this right, the
defendant signed a waiver of his right to prosecution by
indictment, which signature he acknowledged in open court.
court further informed the defendant, pursuant to the
requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, of the constitutional and other rights he would
waive by pleading guilty to the Information. The court then
determined that the defendant understood those rights. The
court advised the defendant that he could not withdraw his
plea if he was dissatisfied with the sentence rendered.
court inquired of the defendant personally as to whether any
threats or promises had been made to him to induce him to
plead, whether any predictions were made regarding the
sentence he might receive, and whether he had any second
thoughts about entering a plea of guilty, to which questions
the defendant responded in the negative.
upon the defendant's plea of guilty, as well as his
factual admission of guilt, the court found that there
existed a factual and legal basis for the defendant's
plea of guilty. Based upon the United States' proffer of
evidence against the defendant, the court found that there
also existed an independent factual basis for the
defendant's plea of guilty. The court further found that
the defendant tendered his plea of guilty voluntarily and
with a full understanding and awareness of the constitutional
and other rights which he gives up by pleading guilty, and
with an awareness of what the United States would have to
prove against him if the case went to trial. The court
further found that the defendant had an appreciation of the
consequences of his plea and accepted the defendant's
plea of guilty.
to Sentencing Guideline § 6B1.1(c), the court deferred
an adjudication of guilt pending receipt of the presentence
investigation report. Accordingly, the court adjudges and the
defendant now stands provisionally guilty of the Information.
court scheduled the disposition of this matter for August 6,
2019, at 11:00 a.m., in Charleston. The Probation Department
is directed to conduct a presentence investigation in this
matter and to provide a report to this court. Unless
otherwise directed by this court, the probation officer is
not to disclose the officer's sentencing recommendation
to anyone except the court.
was remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.
Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion
and Order to counsel of record, the United States Marshal for
the Southern District of West ...