IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

Case Number: 3:18-cr-39

Plaintiff,

- vs -

District Judge Walter H. Rice

DAVID HILL, Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

Defendant. :

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This case came on for hearing on April 11, 2018. The matter was referred to the 

undersigned by request of the presiding District Judge as provided in ¶ 6 of the General Order of 

Assignment and Reference (Day 13-01). The Unites States was represented by Assistant 

United States Attorney Dominick Gerace and Defendant was represented by Attorney Anthony 

VanNoy. Defendant orally consented to proceed before the United States Magistrate Judge for 

this proceeding. 

Defendant, through counsel, knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived indictment

and agreed to proceed by way of information.

The undersigned examined Defendant under oath as to his understanding of the Plea 

Agreement and the effect of entering a plea pursuant to that Agreement. Having conducted the 

colloquy, the Magistrate Judge is persuaded the Defendant understands the rights waived by 

entering a guilty plea and is competent to do so. The Magistrate Judge also concludes that 

execution of the Plea Agreement, which was acknowledged in open court, is Defendant=s 

Case: 3:18-cr-00039-WHR Doc #: 9 Filed: 04/11/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 17
voluntary, knowing, and intelligent act. It is therefore respectfully recommended that the Plea 

Agreement be accepted.

Defendant having executed the Plea Agreement, he tendered a plea of guilty to the offenses

charged in the Information. The Magistrate Judge concludes the guilty pleas are knowing, 

intelligent, and voluntary and that the Statement of Facts made a part of the Plea Agreement, 

whose truth Defendant acknowledged, provides a sufficient factual basis for a finding of guilt. It is 

therefore respectfully recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and Defendant be found guilty 

as charged in the Information.

Anticipating the District Court=s adoption of this Report and Recommendations, the 

Magistrate Judge referred the Defendant for a pre-sentence investigation, released him on his own 

recognizance with pretrial reporting and conditions, and set sentencing before District Judge 

Walter H. Rice on July 9, 2018, at 1:30 A.M. in Courtroom No. 1.

April 11, 2018.

 s/ Michael R. Merz

 United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the 

proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report 

and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to seventeen days 

because this Report is being served by mail. .Such objections shall specify the portions of the 

Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the 

objections. If the Report and Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters 

occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the 

transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate 

Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond 

to another party=s objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure 

to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United 

States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 

(1985).

Case: 3:18-cr-00039-WHR Doc #: 9 Filed: 04/11/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 18