Reported / Citable
Background
Alexandro Galvez-Galindo appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal re-entry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He consented to entering the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.
During the plea proceeding, the court gave the admonishments required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. Galvez-Galindo confirmed that he understood the charge, the rights he would waive, the possible penalties and immigration consequences, the advisory Sentencing Guidelines, and the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez found that Galvez-Galindo was competent and that his plea was free, knowing, and voluntary. The court also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force and that a factual basis supported it.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept Galvez-Galindo’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Galvez-Galindo pleaded guilty to illegal re-entry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remained with the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal court may accept a guilty plea, including confirmation that the defendant understands the charge, waived trial rights, sentencing exposure, and immigration consequences.
Because this was a magistrate judge’s recommendation rather than a final judgment, the district judge retained responsibility for accepting the plea and entering the judgment of guilt.