Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

USA v. Vasquez-Perez — Magistrate accepts guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States v. Marco Antonio Vasquez-Perez
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Del Rio Division)
Judge
JOSEPH A CORDOVA (Judges of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, 2023)
Date Decided
June 29, 2026
Docket No.
2:26-cr-01328-EG
Topics
Criminal Law, Immigration, Guilty Plea, Illegal Reentry
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Marco Antonio Vasquez-Perez was charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. On June 29, 2026, he appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova, represented by counsel, for a felony guilty plea proceeding. The magistrate advised Vasquez-Perez of his rights under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and explained that while the magistrate would accept the plea, the district judge would conduct sentencing.

Vasquez-Perez consented to have his guilty plea taken by the magistrate rather than the district judge. No plea agreement had been reached between the parties.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate made nine findings of fact: (1) the defendant consented to the plea procedure; (2) the defendant understood the nature of the charges and penalties; (3) the defendant understood and waived his constitutional and statutory rights; (4) the defendant pled guilty to Count One without a plea agreement; (5) the plea was free and voluntary; (6) the defendant was competent to enter the plea; (7) there was a sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea; (8) the defendant is found guilty; and (9) the defendant acknowledged potential restitution liability.

Based on these findings, the magistrate recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and that a judgment of guilt be entered against Vasquez-Perez. The case was referred to the district judge for sentencing proceedings.

Key Takeaways

  • The magistrate found all Rule 11 requirements satisfied, including voluntary and knowing entry of the plea with competent counsel.
  • Vasquez-Perez pled without a plea agreement, meaning the district judge has full discretion at sentencing.
  • The defendant acknowledged potential restitution obligations arising from the conviction.

Why It Matters

This proceeding illustrates standard criminal practice in illegal reentry prosecutions under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The detailed Rule 11 findings protect the conviction from appellate challenge based on guilty plea validity or constitutional defects in the plea process.

Because Vasquez-Perez pled without a plea agreement, the district judge is not bound by any sentencing recommendation and will exercise discretion within the statutory penalties for illegal reentry. The magistrate’s recommendation advances the case to the sentencing phase where the district judge will determine the appropriate sentence.

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top