Reported / Citable
Background
Evelin Roxana Quevedo-Arevalo appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
Quevedo-Arevalo consented to enter the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to the presiding district judge’s final approval and sentencing. The magistrate judge conducted the plea proceeding under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Quevedo-Arevalo was competent and understood the charge, her trial rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the possible penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines. The judge also found that no promises, threats, or force induced the plea.
Concluding that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept it and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Quevedo-Arevalo pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Acceptance of the plea and entry of judgment remain subject to action by the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal guilty plea may be accepted, including confirmation that the defendant understands the rights relinquished, possible punishment, immigration consequences, and sentencing process.
It also underscores the limited procedural posture: the magistrate judge issued a recommendation, leaving final approval and sentencing to the district judge.