Reported / Citable
Background
Raul Enrique Chacon-Carballo was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for the purpose of taking a felony guilty plea, as is standard practice under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). On June 30, 2026, the Defendant appeared before Magistrate Judge Joseph A Cordova, along with his counsel, for the plea hearing.
During the hearing, the Magistrate Judge addressed the Defendant personally in open court, informing him of his right to have his plea taken by a United States District Judge and admonishing him as required by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Defendant, with the advice of his counsel, consented to the Magistrate Judge taking his guilty plea, with sentencing to be conducted by the presiding United States District Judge.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge issued Findings of Fact and Recommendation, concluding that Raul Enrique Chacon-Carballo’s guilty plea should be accepted. The findings established that the Defendant understood the nature of the charges and penalties, his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely and voluntarily waived them. Chacon-Carballo pled guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged him with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, without a plea agreement.
The Magistrate Judge further found that the plea was made freely and voluntarily, that the Defendant was competent to enter the plea, and that there was a sufficient factual basis for it. Consequently, the Defendant was found guilty of the charge to which he pled guilty and acknowledged potential restitution obligations. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt against the Defendant, referring the case to the presiding District Judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- A Magistrate Judge conducted a felony guilty plea hearing for illegal reentry.
- The Defendant, Raul Enrique Chacon-Carballo, pled guilty to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
- The Magistrate Judge found the plea to be voluntary, informed, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- A recommendation was made to the District Judge to accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
- The case will proceed to the District Judge for sentencing.
Why It Matters
This case illustrates the routine procedural role of U.S. Magistrate Judges in federal criminal proceedings, particularly in taking guilty pleas and issuing recommendations to the presiding District Judge. It highlights the process by which defendants in felony cases consent to a Magistrate Judge overseeing their plea, streamlining the judicial process while preserving the defendant’s rights to a final judgment and sentencing by an Article III judge.
The clear findings regarding the voluntariness and understanding of the plea are crucial for ensuring due process and preventing future challenges. The recommendation signals the formal conclusion of the plea phase, setting the stage for the District Judge to review the Magistrate Judge’s findings and proceed with the sentencing phase of the criminal case.