Reported / Citable
Background
Luis Gerardo Duran-Osornio appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge under a general order for the taking of the plea.
After being advised that he could have the district judge take his plea, Duran-Osornio consented to proceeding before the magistrate judge. He then pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry into the United States.
The Court’s Holding
Following the Rule 11 colloquy, the magistrate judge found that Duran-Osornio understood the charge, penalties, and rights he was waiving; was competent; and entered the plea freely and voluntarily. The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found Duran-Osornio guilty of the charge to which he pleaded.
The magistrate judge 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 given 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- Duran-Osornio pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation left acceptance of the plea, entry of judgment, and sentencing for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The findings document the procedural safeguards required before a federal felony guilty plea may be accepted, including competency, voluntariness, knowledge of the charge and penalties, waiver of rights, and a sufficient factual basis.
Because this was a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation rather than the district judge’s final disposition, the plea remained subject to acceptance by the presiding district judge.