Reported / Citable
Background
Rondineli Francisco-Ferreira was charged in Count One of an indictment with illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On September 9, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty to the charge.
Francisco-Ferreira consented to entering his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. During the plea hearing, the magistrate judge admonished him as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Francisco-Ferreira was competent and that his plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. She also found that he understood the charge, his trial rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the possible penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines.
Based on those findings, Judge Enriquez recommended that the district judge accept Francisco-Ferreira’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Francisco-Ferreira pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was competent, knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal court may accept a guilty plea, including confirmation that the defendant understands the surrendered trial rights, sentencing exposure, and immigration consequences.
It also underscores the limited procedural role of the magistrate judge: the recommendation advances the prosecution toward judgment, but the district judge retains responsibility for final approval and sentencing.