USA v. Andersen

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 25-CR-41 CJW-MAR
Plaintiff,
vs. ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
CONCERNING DEFENDANT’S
GUILTY PLEA
HAYDEN JAMES RICHEY
ANDERSEN,
Defendant.
__________________________
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On November 19, 2025, a ten-count Superseding Indictment was filed against
defendant and one other person. Defendant was charged in counts 4, 7 & 9. On
December 23, 2025, defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Mark A.
Roberts and entered a plea of guilty to count 4 of the Superseding Indictment. On
December 23, 2025, Judge Roberts filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in
which he recommended defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The parties did not file
objections to Judge Roberts’ R&R. The Court, therefore, undertakes the necessary
review of Judge Roberts’ recommendation to accept defendant’s plea in this case.
II. ANALYSIS
Under the statute, this Court’s standard of review for a magistrate judge’s R&R is
as follows:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions
of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate
judge.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
When parties do not object to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation,
Case 1:25-cr-00041-CJW-MAR Document 59 Filed 01/07/26 Page 1 of 2

2
the Court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A). Similarly, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 59(b) provides for review
of a magistrate judge’s R&R on dispositive motions, where objections are made, as
follows:
The district judge must consider de novo any objection to the magistrate
judge’s recommendation. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify
the recommendation, receive further evidence, or resubmit the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.
FED. R. CRIM. P. 59(b)(3).1
In this case, the parties filed no objections, and it appears to the Court upon review
that Judge Roberts’ findings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Therefore, the
Court ACCEPTS Judge Roberts’ R&R of December 23, 2025, and ACCEPTS
defendant’s plea of guilty in this case to count 4 of the Superseding Indictment.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of January, 2026.
_________________________
C.J. Williams, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa
1 United States v. Cortez-Hernandez, 673 F. App’x 587, 590-91 (8th Cir. 2016) (per curiam),
suggests that a defendant may have the right to de novo review of a magistrate judge’s
recommendation to accept a plea of guilty even if no objection is filed.
Case 1:25-cr-00041-CJW-MAR Document 59 Filed 01/07/26 Page 2 of 2