Reported / Citable
Background
Gabriel Ortega-Vicente was charged in Count One of the indictment with illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). He appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge and pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement.
At the plea hearing, the magistrate judge gave the Rule 11 admonishments and found that Ortega-Vicente understood the charge, the possible penalties, the immigration consequences of his plea, and the rights he would waive by pleading guilty. The plea agreement included a waiver of appellate and collateral-attack rights.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Ortega-Vicente was competent and that his guilty plea was free, knowing, and voluntary. The court also found a factual basis supporting the plea and concluded that it was not induced by promises outside the plea agreement or by threats or force.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. Final approval of the plea and sentencing remain with the presiding district judge.
Key Takeaways
- The magistrate judge recommended acceptance of Ortega-Vicente’s guilty plea to illegal reentry.
- The recommendation followed Rule 11 findings that the plea was competent, knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Written objections before sentencing may be necessary to preserve de novo review and appellate review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.
Why It Matters
This is a plea-stage recommendation, not a final judgment or sentence. It confirms that the magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied and placed the case before the district judge for final plea acceptance and sentencing.