`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`LUFKIN DIVISION
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`
`VS.
`
`
`
`AUTRY FAYE JENKINS
`
` §
` §
` §
` §
` §
` §
` §
`
`CASE NO. 9:15-CR-9
`
`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 September 8, 2015, this case came before the undersigned magistrate judge for entry of
`
`a guilty plea by the Defendant, Autry Faye Jenkins, to Count One of the Information. Count One
`
`alleges that on or about and between March 14, 1988 and August 31, 2013, in the Eastern District
`
`of Texas, Autry Faye Jenkins, defendant, in a matter within the jurisdiction of SSA, having
`
`knowledge of the occurrence of an event affecting the continued right to Social Security SIB
`
`payments of another individual in whose behalf defendant was receiving such payments, concealed
`
`and failed to disclose such event with the intent to fraudulently secure payment when no payment
`
`was authorized. Specifically, defendant, Autry Faye Jenkins, intentionally concealed the death of
`
`her mother, Mandy Jenkins, in order to continue to receive and spend SIB payments made by SSA
`
`to her mother. By such action, defendant, Autry Faye Jenkins, stole approximately $200,278.00 in
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`Case 9:15-cr-00009-MHS-KFG Document 16 Filed 09/09/15 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 35
`
`SSA SIB payments to which she was not entitled, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(4).
`
`The Defendant entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the Information 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 her 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 and the Government have entered into a plea agreement which
`
`was disclosed and addressed in open court, entered into the record, and placed under seal. The
`
`Defendant verified that she understood the terms of the plea agreement, agreed with the
`
`Government’s summary of the plea agreement, and acknowledged that it was her signature on the
`
`plea agreement. To the extent the plea agreement contains recommendations and requests pursuant
`
`to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11 (c)(1)(B), the court advised the Defendant that she has no right to withdraw
`
`the plea if the court does not follow the particular recommendations or requests. To the extent that
`
`any or all of the terms of the plea agreement are pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the undersigned
`
`advised the Defendant that she will have the opportunity to withdraw her plea of guilty should the
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`Case 9:15-cr-00009-MHS-KFG Document 16 Filed 09/09/15 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 36
`
`court not follow those particular terms of the plea agreement.1
`
`c.
`
`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 (other than the promises set forth in the plea
`
`agreement). See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(2).
`
`d.
`
`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
`
`her conduct falls within the definition of the crime charged under Title 42, United States Code,
`
`Section 408(a)(4) (Social Security Fraud).
`
`STATEMENT OF REASONS
`
`As factual support for the Defendant’s guilty plea, the Government presented a factual basis.
`
`See Factual Basis and Stipulation. In support, the Government would prove that the Defendant is
`
`the same person charged in the Information and that the events described in the Information
`
`occurred in the Eastern District of Texas and elsewhere. The Government would also have proven,
`
`1“(3) Judicial Consideration of a Plea Agreement.
`(A) To the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the court may accept the
`agreement, reject it, or defer a decision until the court has reviewed the presentence report.
`(B) To the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(B), the court must advise the defendant that
`the defendant has no right to withdraw the plea if the court does not follow the recommendation or request.
`(4) Accepting a Plea Agreement. If the court accepts the plea agreement, it must inform the defendant that to the extent
`the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the agreed disposition will be included in the judgment.
`(5) Rejecting a Plea Agreement. If the court rejects a plea agreement containing provisions of the type specified in Rule
`11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the court must do the following on the record and in open court (or, for good cause, in camera):
`(A) inform the parties that the court rejects the plea agreement;
`(B) advise the defendant personally that the court is not required to follow the plea agreement and give the defendant
`an opportunity to withdraw the plea; and
`(C) advise the defendant personally that if the plea is not withdrawn, the court may dispose of the case less favorably
`toward the defendant than the plea agreement contemplated.” FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(c)(3)-(5).
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`Case 9:15-cr-00009-MHS-KFG Document 16 Filed 09/09/15 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 37
`
`beyond a reasonable doubt, each and every essential element of the offenses as alleged in Count One
`
`of the Information 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 stipulation filed in support of the plea agreement, and the
`
`Defendant’s admissions made in open court in response to the undersigned’s further inquiry into the
`
`factual basis and stipulation.
`
`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 she 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 Information. Accordingly, it is further
`
`recommended that the District Court finally adjudge the Defendant, Autry Faye Jenkins guilty of
`
`the charged offense under Title 42, United States Code, Section 408(a)(4) (Social Security Fraud).
`
`The District Court should defer its decision to accept or reject the plea agreement until there
`
`has been an opportunity to review the presentence report. If the plea agreement is rejected and the
`
`Defendant still persists in her guilty plea, the disposition of the case may be less favorable to the
`
`Defendant than that contemplated by the plea agreement. The Defendant is ordered to report to the
`
`United States Probation Department for the preparation of a presentence report. The Defendant has
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`Case 9:15-cr-00009-MHS-KFG Document 16 Filed 09/09/15 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 38
`
`the right to allocute before the District Court before imposition of sentence.
`
`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, and (3) be served and filed
`
`within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this report, and (4) no more than eight
`
`(8) pages in length. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) (2009); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2); Local Rule CV-
`
`72(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 recommendations to which a specific objection is
`
`timely made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2009); FED R. CIV. P. 72(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).
`
`-5-
`
`_________________________
`Zack Hawthorn
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`SIGNED this 9th day of September, 2015.