Reported / Citable
Background
The United States charged Martin Geraldo Carrillo-Escobar in Count One of an indictment with illegal reentry after removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
The district court referred the administration of Carrillo-Escobar’s guilty plea to a United States magistrate judge under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. After conducting the Rule 11 hearing, the magistrate judge issued findings of fact and recommended that the court accept the plea and find Carrillo-Escobar guilty. Neither party objected.
The Court’s Holding
Judge Sean D. Jordan adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation on the guilty plea. The court accepted Carrillo-Escobar’s guilty plea and found him guilty of Count One, illegal reentry after removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
The court deferred acceptance of the parties’ plea agreement until it reviews the presentence report. The order therefore resolves guilt on the charged count but leaves acceptance of the plea agreement for a later stage.
Key Takeaways
- The court adopted an unopposed magistrate judge’s Rule 11 findings and plea recommendation.
- Carrillo-Escobar was adjudged guilty of illegal reentry after removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
- The court accepted the guilty plea while deferring a decision on the plea agreement pending review of the presentence report.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the procedural distinction between accepting a defendant’s guilty plea and accepting a plea agreement. A district court may adjudicate guilt after a proper Rule 11 proceeding while reserving judgment on the agreement until it has reviewed the presentence report.