Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Hurtado-Guillermo — magistrate judge recommends accepting guilty plea

Reported / Citable

Case
United States v. Magdaleno Hurtado-Guillermo
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Judge
Miguel A. Torres
Date Decided
August 10, 2026
Docket No.
EP:26-CR-01941(1)-LS
Topics
Guilty plea; Immigration offenses; Rule 11

Background

Magdaleno Hurtado-Guillermo appeared with counsel for a plea hearing in the Western District of Texas. He pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, charging false personation in immigration matters under 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a).

Hurtado-Guillermo consented to enter his plea before a magistrate judge, with final approval and sentencing reserved for the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 colloquy and advised him of his trial rights, the charge, potential penalties, immigration consequences, and the court’s sentencing obligations.

The Court’s Holding

Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres found that Hurtado-Guillermo was competent and that his guilty plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an adequate factual basis. The judge also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force.

The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose sentence.

Key Takeaways

  • The defendant pleaded guilty to false personation in immigration matters under 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a).
  • The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied, including competence, voluntariness, and a factual basis for the plea.
  • Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remained for the district judge.

Why It Matters

The report preserves the district judge’s role in final plea acceptance and sentencing while documenting that the defendant received the required Rule 11 advisements. It also warns that objections to the findings and recommendation must be filed before sentencing or may limit further review.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top