Reported / Citable
Background
Adela Pineda-Chavez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 7, 2026, to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred under a general order for the magistrate judge to conduct the plea proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After being advised that she had the right to have a district judge take her plea, Pineda-Chavez consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. She pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry into the United States.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Pineda-Chavez understood the charge, potential penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights she was waiving. The judge also found that she was competent, that her plea was free and voluntary, and that a sufficient factual basis supported the plea.
The magistrate judge found Pineda-Chavez guilty of the charge and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The matter was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were advised that objections to the findings and recommendation were due within 14 days of receipt.
Key Takeaways
- Pineda-Chavez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to illegal reentry into the United States.
- The magistrate judge concluded that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an adequate factual basis.
- The recommendation leaves acceptance of the plea, entry of judgment, and sentencing to the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The findings document the procedural safeguards required when a magistrate judge conducts a felony plea hearing, including the defendant’s consent and a determination that the plea complies with Rule 11. They also preserve the district judge’s role in acting on the recommendation and imposing sentence.