Case Information
*1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §
§
§
v. CASE NO. 1:21-CR-00098-TH §
§
§
ROBERT LEE DURANT §
§ FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION ON GUILTY PLEA BEFORE THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
By order of the district court, this matter is referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for administration of the guilty plea under Rule 11. Magistrate judges have the
statutory authority to conduct a felony guilty plea proceeding as an “additional duty” pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). United States v. Bolivar-Munoz , 313 F.3d 253, 255 (5th Cir. 2002).
On February 16, 2022, this case came before the undersigned magistrate judge for entry of a guilty plea by the Defendant, Robert Lee Durant, to Count One of the Indictment. Count
One alleges that on or about May 7, 2021, in the Eastern District of Texas, Robert Lee Durant,
the Defendant, did knowingly and unlawfully possess in and affecting interstate or foreign
commerce, a firearm, to wit: a Smith & Wesson Model: SD9VE, 9mm caliber pistol bearing SN:
HFX7833 while knowing that he had been convicted of a crime or crimes punishable by
imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) -
Possession of a Firearm by a Prohibited Person.
The Defendant entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment into the record at the hearing. After conducting the proceeding in the form and manner prescribed by Federal Rule
of Criminal Procedure 11, the undersigned finds:
a. That the Defendant, after consultation with his attorney, has knowingly, freely and voluntarily consented to the administration of the guilty plea in this case by a United States
magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Texas, subject to a final approval and imposition of
sentence by the District Court.
b. That the Defendant is fully competent and capable of entering an informed plea, that the Defendant is aware of the nature of the charges and the consequences of the plea, and
that the plea of guilty is made freely, knowingly, and voluntarily. Upon addressing the
Defendant personally in open court, the undersigned determines that the Defendant’s plea is
knowing and voluntary and did not result from force, threats or promises. See F
11(b)(2).
c. That the Defendant’s knowing and voluntary plea is supported by an independent factual basis establishing each of the essential elements of the offense and the Defendant realizes
that his conduct falls within the definition of the crime charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) -
Possession of a Firearm by a Prohibited Person.
STATEMENT OF REASONS As factual support for the Defendant’s guilty plea, the Government presented a factual basis. See Factual Basis. In support, the Government would prove that the Defendant is the
same person charged in the Indictment, and that the events described in the Indictment occurred
in the Eastern District of Texas. The Government would also have proven, beyond a reasonable
doubt, each and every essential element of the offense as alleged in Count One of the Indictment
through the testimony of witnesses, including expert witnesses, and admissible exhibits. In
support of the Defendant’s plea, the undersigned incorporates the proffer of evidence described
in detail in the factual basis, and the Defendant’s admissions made in open court in response to
the undersigned’s further inquiry into the factual basis.
The Defendant agreed with and stipulated to the evidence presented in the factual basis.
Counsel for the Defendant and the Government attested to the Defendant’s competency and
capability to enter an informed plea of guilty. The Defendant agreed with the evidence presented
by the Government and personally testified that he was entering the guilty plea knowingly, freely
and voluntarily.
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION IT IS THEREFORE the recommendation of the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge that the District Court accept the Guilty Plea of the Defendant, which the undersigned
determines to be supported by an independent factual basis establishing each of the essential
elements of the offense charged in Count One of the Indictment. Accordingly, it is further
recommended that the District Court finally adjudge the Defendant, Robert Lee Durant, guilty of
the charged offense under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) - Possession of a Firearm by a Prohibited
Person.
OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), each party to this action has the right to file objections to this Report and Recommendation. Objections to this Report must (1) be in writing,
(2) specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which the party objects, (3) be
served and filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report, and (4)
be no more than eight (8) pages in length. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); F . R. C RIM .
59(b)(2); E.D. T EX . CR-59(c). A party who objects to this Report is entitled to a de
novo determination by the United States District Judge of those proposed findings and ___________________________________ Christine L Stetson
recommendations to which a specific objection is timely made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); F P. 59(b)(3).
A party’s failure to file specific, written objections to the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in this report, within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy
of this report, bars that party from: (1) entitlement to de novo review by the United States District
Judge of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, see Rodriguez v. Bowen , 857 F.2d 275,
276–77 (5th Cir. 1988), and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error, of any such
findings of fact and conclusions of law accepted by the United States District Judge, see
Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n , 79 F.3d 1415, 1428–29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
SIGNED this the 16th day of February, 2022.
