USA v. Red Elk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
CENTRAL DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TIMOTHY RED ELK,
Defendant.
3:22-CR-30010-RAL
3:19-CR-30113-RAL
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ON DEFENDANT'S CHANGE OF PLEA
AND ADMISSIONS TO SUPERVISED
RELEASE REVOCATION PETITION
The above-captioned matter came on before the Court for hearing on Thursday,
May 19, 2022. 	Defendant, Timothy Red Elk, appeared in person and by his counsel,
Amanda Work , while Plaintiff, United States of America ("Government") appeared
through Carl Thunem, an Assistant United States Attorney.
Defendant consented in open court to the Court taking his change of plea and his
consent was knowingly and voluntarily made. The Government likewise consented to
the Court taking Defendant’s plea.
Defendant has reached a plea agreement with the Government wherein he intends
to plead guilty to Count 1 as contained in the Indictment. Defendant is charged in Count
1 of the Indictment with First Degree Burglary in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1153 and SDCL
22-32-1. At the hearing, Defendant was advised of the nature of the charge to which he
would plead guilty and the maximum penalty applicable, specifically: 	25 years custody;
250,000 fine, or both; 	5 years supervised release; 	3 additional years imprisonment if
supervised release is revoked on any such revocation; $100 assessment; and restitution.
Case 3:22-cr-30010-RAL Document 28 Filed 05/19/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>

2
Upon questioning Defendant personally in open court, it is the finding of the Court
that Defendant is fully competent and capable of entering an informed plea, that he is
aware of the nature of the charged offense and the consequences of the plea, and that his
plea of guilty to the offense contained in Count 1 of the Indictment is a knowing and
voluntary plea supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential
elements of the offense. It is, therefore, the Court's recommendation that the guilty plea
to Count 1 of the Indictment be accepted and that Defendant be adjudged guilty of that
offense.
Defendant thereafter admitted that he had previously been placed on supervised
release, that the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 2 & 3 of the Petition to Revoke
Supervised Release, Docket No. 33, were true and that he had violated the terms and
conditions of his supervised release. After examining Defendant, the Court found that
his admissions were knowingly and voluntarily made and that a factual basis existed for
the same. Based on the foregoing, the Court
RECOMMENDS that Defendant's admissions be accepted, that his supervised
release be revoked and that a dispositional hearing be held pursuant to 18 U.S.C. '3583(e).
The parties having waived their right to object to this report and recommendation
and there being no objection from Defendant or counsel, it is hereby
ORDERED that a combined presentence investigation report shall be forthwith
prepared by the United States Probation Office. It is further
ORDERED 	that 	Defendant 	shall 	remain 	detained 	pending 	a 	joint
sentencing/dispositional hearing before the District Court or until further order of a
judicial officer of this District.
Case 3:22-cr-30010-RAL Document 28 Filed 05/19/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>

3
DATED this 19th day of May, 2022.
BY THE COURT:
MARK A. MORENO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 3:22-cr-30010-RAL Document 28 Filed 05/19/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>