Reported / Citable
Background
David Avendano-Angeles was charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova in the Western District of Texas, Del Rio Division, for the taking of a felony guilty plea pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
On June 30, 2026, the defendant and his counsel appeared before Magistrate Judge Cordova in open court. The magistrate informed the defendant of his right to have his plea taken by the district judge and admonished him of his rights under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Avendano-Angeles entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily with the advice of counsel. The defendant pled guilty to Count One—illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326—without a plea agreement. The magistrate found that the defendant understood the nature of the charges and penalties, understood his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely waived them.
Based on these findings, the magistrate determined there was sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea, that the defendant was competent to enter it, and that the defendant is hereby guilty of the charge. The magistrate recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and that judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant. The case was referred to the presiding United States District Judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant pled guilty to federal illegal reentry charge without a plea agreement
- Magistrate found plea was knowing and voluntary with full understanding of constitutional rights and penalties
- Guilty plea recommendation satisfied Rule 11 procedural safeguards
- Defendant may be subject to restitution at sentencing
Why It Matters
This case exemplifies the federal magistrate’s role in taking felony guilty pleas while preserving the district judge’s sentencing authority. The magistrate’s detailed findings ensure compliance with Rule 11’s requirement that guilty pleas be entered knowingly and voluntarily—a critical protection against subsequent ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
For practitioners in border districts handling immigration matters, this decision illustrates standard procedures in federal reentry prosecutions. The split jurisdiction—magistrate taking the plea, district judge conducting sentencing—is routine in federal criminal practice and has significant implications for appeal rights and post-conviction remedies.