Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

U.S. v. Perez-Rodriguez — Magistrate judge recommends acceptance of guilty plea to illegal re-entry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Debora Lizeth Perez-Rodriguez
Court
United States District Court, Western District of Texas (Del Rio Division)
Judge
MATTHEW H. WATTERS (Judges of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, 2023)
Date Decided
June 11, 2026
Docket No.
2:26-cr-01229
Topics
Criminal Law, Immigration, Illegal Re-entry, Federal Guilty Plea Procedure
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Debora Lizeth Perez-Rodriguez was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas with illegal re-entry into the United States. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3), the case was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for the taking of a felony guilty plea. On June 11, 2026, the defendant appeared before the magistrate judge with her counsel.

The magistrate judge provided the required constitutional admonitions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, informing the defendant of her right to have the plea taken by the district judge and her various constitutional and statutory rights, including the right to trial by jury and the right to cross-examine witnesses.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that the defendant’s guilty plea to Count One—illegal re-entry into the United States—was made freely and voluntarily, with the benefit of counsel, and without any plea agreement. The magistrate judge determined that the defendant understood the nature of the charges and the applicable penalties, was fully apprised of her constitutional and statutory rights, and was competent to enter the plea.

Based on these findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the defendant’s guilty plea be ACCEPTED and that a judgment of guilt be entered against her. The magistrate judge found sufficient factual basis for the plea and noted that the defendant may be subject to restitution. The case is now referred to the presiding United States District Judge for final acceptance of the plea recommendation and for sentencing.

Key Takeaways

  • The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal re-entry without a plea agreement
  • The magistrate judge found the plea was made freely and voluntarily with full understanding of constitutional rights
  • The final decision on accepting the plea and sentencing rests with the district judge
  • The defendant may be subject to restitution as part of any sentence imposed

Why It Matters

This case illustrates the federal procedure for accepting felony guilty pleas, where magistrate judges conduct the Rule 11 colloquy and make recommendations regarding plea validity. The magistrate judge’s thorough inquiry into the defendant’s understanding of her rights and the voluntary nature of the plea is critical to ensuring the constitutional validity of the plea and preventing later appellate challenges.

Illegal re-entry is a serious federal immigration crime that carries significant criminal penalties. The procedural safeguards observed here—ensuring the defendant’s full awareness of rights, the voluntariness of the plea, and adequate counsel—reflect the courts’ commitment to protecting defendants’ due process rights while maintaining the integrity of guilty pleas in the federal criminal justice system.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top