Reported / Citable
Background
Julio Cesar Ramos-Bermudez was charged with one count of illegal re-entry into the United States. On June 11, 2026, he appeared before Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters with his counsel for a Rule 11 guilty plea hearing in the Western District of Texas. The defendant consented to have his plea taken by the magistrate judge, with sentencing to be conducted by the presiding district judge.
The magistrate judge conducted a colloquy with the defendant in open court to ensure compliance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, which governs the acceptance of guilty pleas. The defendant was specifically admonished regarding his rights and the consequences of his plea.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that the defendant understood the nature of the charges and applicable penalties, understood his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely and voluntarily waived those rights. The defendant pled guilty to Count One without a plea agreement. The magistrate judge concluded the plea was made freely and voluntarily, that the defendant is competent to enter the plea, and that there is a sufficient factual basis for the guilty 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. The magistrate also noted that the defendant acknowledged potential subjection to restitution. The case is referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant’s guilty plea to illegal re-entry was entered without a plea agreement.
- All Rule 11 requirements were satisfied: the defendant understood the charges, understood and waived his rights, and entered the plea voluntarily and competently.
- The magistrate judge’s recommendation does not determine sentencing, which remains for the district judge.
- The defendant may be subject to restitution as part of sentencing.
Why It Matters
This decision illustrates the federal magistrate judge’s role in accepting felony guilty pleas under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). The careful compliance with Rule 11 requirements protects the integrity of the guilty plea process and prevents appellate challenges on the grounds that the plea was unknowingly or involuntarily entered.
Illegal re-entry remains one of the most frequently prosecuted federal crimes, particularly in border districts. This case exemplifies the procedural framework through which such charges are resolved when defendants choose to plead guilty rather than proceed to trial.