Reported / Citable
Background
Juan Jimon-Gomez appeared with counsel and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He entered the plea under a plea agreement.
The magistrate judge conducted the plea hearing under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. Jimon-Gomez consented to pleading before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres found that Jimon-Gomez understood the charge, the rights he was giving up, the possible penalties, the immigration consequences, and the terms of the plea agreement, including its appeal and collateral-attack waiver.
The magistrate judge further found that Jimon-Gomez was competent and that his plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- This was a report and recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea or sentence.
- The plea concerned illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- Failure to file written objections before sentencing may bar de novo review and appellate review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation confirms that the Rule 11 plea colloquy satisfied the court as to competency, voluntariness, and factual basis. Unless the district judge declines to adopt the recommendation or objections alter the outcome, the case will proceed to judgment and sentencing on the illegal-reentry count.