Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 24-CR-20204-MOORE/Elfenbein UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
ROBERTO QUEVEDO,
Defendant. /
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGE OF PLEA THIS CAUSE
is before the Court following an Order of Referral to conduct a proceeding for acceptance of a guilty plea by Defendant Roberto Quevedo. ECF No. [8]. Based upon the change of plea hearing conducted on August 23, 2024, this Court makes the following findings, and recommends that the guilty plea be accepted. The undersigned advised Defendant of his right to have these proceedings conducted
by the District Judge assigned to the case, and that this Court was conducting the change of plea hearing pursuant to an Order of Referral from the District Court. I further advised Defendant that the District Judge assigned to this case would be the sentencing judge and would make all findings and rulings concerning Defendant’s sentence. I advised Defendant that he did not have to permit the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge to conduct this hearing and could request that the change of plea hearing be conducted by the District Judge assigned to the case. Defendant, his attorney, and the Assistant United States Attorney consented on the record to the undersigned conducting the change of plea hearing. The plea colloquy was conducted in accordance with the outline set forth in the
Bench Book for District Judges, and in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
3. Defendant pled guilty to the sole count of the Information, which charges him with conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. I advised Defendant that the maximum penalty the Court could impose is 10 years’ imprisonment, followed by a term of supervised release of 3 years. In addition to any term of imprisonment, the Court may impose a fine of up to $250,000 or twice the gross gain or gross loss from the offense, restitution and criminal forfeiture, and the Court will assess a mandatory special assessment of $100.00, which Defendant has agreed is due to be paid at the time of sentencing. Defendant was also advised of the possibility of forfeiture and restitution and the potential for immigration consequences, including deportation. Defendant acknowledged that he understood the possible maximum penalties that could be imposed in the case.
4. To set forth the factual basis for the entry of the plea, the Government proffered the facts it would have established at trial, memorialized in a written Factual Proffer. See ECF No. [12]. The Government established all the essential elements of the crime to which Defendant is pleading guilty. Defendant acknowledged that the facts proffered by the Government were accurate. Defense counsel agreed that the proffer satisfied all elements of the crime charged. The Parties entered into a written plea agreement that was thereafter filed with the
Court. ECF No. [11]. I reviewed that plea agreement on the record, including the appeal waiver, and Defendant acknowledged that he had reviewed the entire agreement with counsel before he signed it. Defendant acknowledged that he is satisfied with his attorney and that he has had a full opportunity to discuss all facets of his case with his attorney. Defendant indicated that he has reviewed discovery with counsel. Based upon all the foregoing and the plea colloquy conducted by this Court, the
undersigned finds that Defendant is fully competent and capable of entering an informed plea, that Defendant is aware of the nature of the charges and the consequences of the plea, and that the plea of *3 guilty is a knowing and voluntary plea supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of the offense. In addition, the undersigned specifically finds that Defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal his sentence in this case is knowing and voluntary. Therefore, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendant be found to have freely and voluntarily entered his guilty plea to the sole count of the Information filed in this case, as more particularly described herein, and that Defendant be adjudicated guilty of the offense as charged. A pre-sentence investigation report is being prepared for the District Court by the
United States Probation Office. The sentencing will be set by separate order.
The Parties will have FOURTEEN (14) CALENDAR DAYS from the date of service of this Report and Recommendation within which to file written objections, if any, for consideration by the United States District Judge. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 59(b), Eleventh Circuit Rule 3-1, and accompanying Internal Operating Procedure 3, the Parties are hereby notified that failure to object in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on August 23, 2024. ____________________________________ MARTY FULGUEIRA ELFENBEIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE cc: The Honorable K. Michael Moore
Counsel of record