Reported / Citable
Background
Alfredo Gutierrez-Franco appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova for the taking of a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge under a general order, while sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
After receiving Rule 11 admonishments and consenting to have the magistrate judge take his plea, Gutierrez-Franco pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Count One: conspiracy to transport illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I) and (B)(i).
The Court’s Holding
Judge Cordova found that Gutierrez-Franco understood the charge, penalties, and rights he was waiving; that he was competent; and that his plea was knowing, free, and voluntary. The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found Gutierrez-Franco guilty of the offense to which he pleaded.
Because the filing was a findings and recommendation rather than a final plea-acceptance order, the magistrate judge 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.
Key Takeaways
- The magistrate judge recommended acceptance of Gutierrez-Franco’s guilty plea to conspiracy to transport illegal aliens.
- The findings concluded that the plea satisfied Rule 11’s knowing, voluntary, and factual-basis requirements.
- Any objections to the recommendation must be filed within 14 days, subject to the stated consequences for failing to object.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the magistrate-judge plea process in a felony case: the magistrate judge may conduct the plea proceeding with the defendant’s consent, but the district judge remains responsible for accepting the recommendation and imposing sentence.