1 

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

 EASTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 vs. Criminal Action 2:17-cr-269(1) 

 JUDGE JAMES L. GRAHAM 

CANDACE BERNICE VILLAR 

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

 Defendant Candace Bernice Villar is charged by Information with 

conspiracy to defraud the United States by wire fraud in violation of 

18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 371, with making false claims against the United 

States in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 287, 2, and with structuring 

monetary transactions to avoid reporting requirements in violation of 

31 U.S.C. § 5324. The United States of America and defendant entered 

into a plea agreement whereby defendant agreed to enter a plea of 

guilty to all three counts of the Information.1

 On January 8, 2018, 

defendant, accompanied by her counsel, appeared for an arraignment and 

entry of guilty plea proceeding. Defendant consented, pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §636(b)(3), to enter a guilty plea before a Magistrate Judge. 

See United States v. Cukaj, 2001 WL 1587410 at *1 (6th Cir. 2001) 

[Magistrate Judge may accept a guilty plea with the express consent of 

the defendant and where no objection to the report and recommendation 

is filed]; United States v. Torres, 258 F.3d 791, 796 (8th Cir. 2001); 

United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261, 263-69 (5th Cir. 1997); United 

States v. Ciapponi, 77 F.3d 1247, 1251 (10th Cir. 1996). Defendant also 

waived her right to an indictment in open court and after being 

 1 The Plea Agreement, ECF No. 3, was executed pursuant to the provisions 

of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) and includes an agreed restitution obligation 

and an appellate waiver provision. Under the Plea Agreement, defendant also 

agrees not to contest the forfeiture provision contained in the Information. 
advised of the nature of the charges and of her rights. See Fed. R. 

Crim P. 7(b). 

 During the plea proceeding, the undersigned observed the 

appearance and responsiveness of defendant in answering questions. 

Based on that observation, the undersigned is satisfied that, at the 

time she entered her guilty pleas, defendant was in full possession of 

her faculties, was not suffering from any apparent physical or mental 

illness, and was not under the influence of narcotics or alcohol. 

 Prior to accepting defendant’s pleas, the undersigned addressed 

defendant personally and in open court and determined her competence 

to plead. Based on the observations of the undersigned, defendant 

understands the nature and meaning of the charges in the Information

and the consequences of her pleas of guilty to those charges. 

Defendant was also addressed personally and in open court and advised 

of each of the rights referred to in Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. 

 Having engaged in the colloquy required by Rule 11, the Court 

concludes that defendant’s pleas are voluntary. Defendant 

acknowledged that the plea agreement signed by her, her attorney and 

the attorney for the United States and filed on November 20, 2017, 

represents the only promises made by anyone regarding the charges in 

the Information. Defendant was advised that the District Judge may 

accept or reject the plea agreement. Defendant was further advised 

that, if the Court refuses to accept the plea agreement, defendant 

will have the opportunity to withdraw her guilty pleas but that, if 

she does not withdraw her guilty pleas, the District Judge may impose 

a sentence that is more severe than the sentence contemplated in the 

plea agreement, up to the statutory maximums. 

 Defendant confirmed the accuracy of the material aspects of the 

statement of facts supporting the charges, which is attached to the 

Plea Agreement. She confirmed that she is pleading guilty to Counts 1 

- 3 of the Information because she is in fact guilty of those 
3 

offenses. The Court concludes that there is a factual basis for the 

pleas. 

 The Court concludes that defendant’s pleas of guilty to Counts 1, 

2, and 3 of the Information are knowingly and voluntarily made with 

understanding of the nature and meaning of the charges and of the 

consequences of the pleas. 

 It is therefore RECOMMENDED that defendant’s guilty pleas to 

Counts 1, 2, and 3 of the Information be accepted. Decision on 

acceptance or rejection of the plea agreement was deferred for 

consideration by the District Judge after the preparation of a 

presentence investigation report. 

 In accordance with S.D. Ohio Crim. R. 32.1, and as expressly 

agreed to by defendant through counsel, a written presentence 

investigation report will be prepared by the United States Probation 

Office. Defendant will be asked to provide information; defendant’s 

attorney may be present if defendant so wishes. Objections to the 

presentence report must be made in accordance with the rules of this 

Court. 

 If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report 

and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file 

and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, 

specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part 

thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 

U.S.C. §636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be 

filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy 

thereof. F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

 The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to 

the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to 

de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the 

decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. 

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Federation of 
Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States 

v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). 

January 8, 2018 s/ Norah McCann King 

 Date Norah McCann King 

 United States Magistrate Judge