USA v. Perez-Hernandez — Magistrate judge recommended accepting guilty plea to document fraud charge

Reported / Citable

Background

Roman Perez-Hernandez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546. He consented to entering the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to the presiding district judge’s final approval and sentencing.

During the Rule 11 proceeding, Perez-Hernandez was advised of the trial rights he would relinquish by pleading guilty, the nature of the charge, the immigration consequences of the plea, and the possible penalties. He also acknowledged that counsel had explained the plea’s immigration consequences.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Perez-Hernandez was competent and that his plea was freely, knowingly, and voluntarily made. The court further 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 the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence; those matters remained for the presiding district judge.

Key Takeaways

• The Rule 11 findings addressed Perez-Hernandez’s understanding of his rights, the charge, potential penalties, immigration consequences, and the advisory Sentencing Guidelines.
• The magistrate judge determined that the plea was supported by a factual basis and was entered competently, knowingly, freely, and voluntarily.
• The notice warned that failing to file written objections before sentencing may bar de novo determination by the district judge and would bar appellate review of factual findings later accepted or adopted by the district judge.

Why It Matters

The report documents the procedural safeguards used to assess whether Perez-Hernandez’s guilty plea satisfies Rule 11, including confirmation that he understood both the rights surrendered and the possible immigration and sentencing consequences.

Because the filing is a report and recommendation, its immediate effect is limited: the district judge retains responsibility for deciding whether to accept the plea, enter judgment, and impose sentence.