Reported / Citable
Background
Lucio Hidalgo Ambrocio appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for the taking of a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred under a general order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After receiving Rule 11 admonishments, Ambrocio consented to having the magistrate judge take his plea. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, charging illegal reentry into the United States. Sentencing was reserved for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
Judge Watters found that Ambrocio understood the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights; that he knowingly and voluntarily waived those rights; and that he was competent to plead guilty. The magistrate judge also found that the plea was free and voluntary and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
The magistrate judge found Ambrocio guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The recommendation advised the parties that objections were due within 14 days and that failure to object could limit later review.
Key Takeaways
- This was a findings-and-recommendation ruling, not the district court’s final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision.
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied and referred the case to the district judge for sentencing.
Why It Matters
The decision reflects the magistrate judge’s role in conducting a felony plea proceeding with the defendant’s consent while leaving final acceptance of the plea and sentencing to the district court. Parties seeking de novo district-court review of the recommendation must timely file written objections.