Reported / Citable
Background
The case was referred to a U.S. magistrate judge to take Cindy Yanelli Castillo Perez’s felony guilty plea. Castillo Perez and her counsel appeared before the magistrate judge on July 6, 2026, and she consented to having the magistrate judge conduct the plea proceeding.
After receiving the required Rule 11 admonishments, Castillo Perez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment, which charged making a false statement or representation to a federal agency or department. Sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Castillo Perez understood the charge, potential penalties, and rights she was waiving; was competent to plead guilty; and entered the plea freely and voluntarily. The judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and noted that Castillo Perez acknowledged she might be subject to restitution.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The findings and recommendation were not a final sentencing decision, and the matter was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- Castillo Perez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to making a false statement or representation to a federal agency or department.
- The magistrate judge found the plea knowing, voluntary, competent, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The magistrate judge recommended acceptance of the plea and entry of judgment, while leaving sentencing to the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the Rule 11 findings required before a felony guilty plea may be accepted. It also preserves the distinction between the magistrate judge’s role in conducting the plea proceeding and the district judge’s authority to act on the recommendation and impose sentence.