United States v. Mejia — Magistrate judge recommended accepting guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Background

Darwin Javier Mejia appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters to plead guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry into the United States. Mejia entered the plea without a plea agreement.

The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge for the taking of a felony guilty plea. After being advised that he could have the district judge take his plea, Mejia consented to proceeding before the magistrate judge, who personally addressed him in open court and administered the required Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 admonishments.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Mejia understood the charge, potential penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge also found Mejia competent, determined that his plea was knowing, free, and voluntary, and concluded that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.

Based on those findings, the magistrate judge found Mejia guilty of the charge to which he pleaded and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and Mejia acknowledged that he might be subject to restitution.

Key Takeaways

• Mejia pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to illegal reentry into the United States.
• The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and recommended that the district judge accept it and enter a judgment of guilt.
• Any objections to the findings and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after receipt of the report and recommendation; failure to object may forfeit de novo review and generally limit appellate review to plain error.

Why It Matters

The report illustrates the procedure for taking a felony guilty plea before a magistrate judge with the defendant’s consent. Although the magistrate judge conducted the plea colloquy and made the necessary findings, acceptance of the plea, entry of judgment, and sentencing remained before the presiding district judge.