Reported / Citable
Background
Rodrigo Eulogio-Hernandez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 9, 2026, 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, Eulogio-Hernandez consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. He 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 Eulogio-Hernandez understood the charge, potential penalties, and the rights he was waiving. The judge also found that the defendant was competent, entered the plea freely and voluntarily, and had supplied a sufficient factual basis for it.
The magistrate judge found Eulogio-Hernandez guilty of the charge and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. Sentencing was referred to the presiding district judge.
Key Takeaways
- Eulogio-Hernandez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge concluded that the plea complied with Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an adequate factual basis.
- The recommendation remains subject to district-court review, and the parties have 14 days after receiving it to file written objections.
Why It Matters
The findings document the procedural safeguards supporting the felony guilty plea and provide the basis for the district judge to accept it and enter judgment. They also preserve the parties’ opportunity to object before the district court acts on the recommendation.