Reported / Citable
Background
Marroquin Bartolome-Francisco was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On September 10, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty to the indictment.
Bartolome-Francisco consented to enter his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. During the plea proceeding, the magistrate judge advised him of his trial rights, the nature and potential consequences of the charge, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, and the court’s consideration of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Bartolome-Francisco was competent and that his guilty plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The judge also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force.
Based on those Rule 11 findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the 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
- Bartolome-Francisco pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal court may accept a guilty plea, including confirmation that the defendant understands the charge, trial rights, immigration consequences, and possible penalties.
It also underscores the limited role of the magistrate judge in this proceeding: the magistrate judge conducted the plea hearing and issued a recommendation, while final approval and sentencing remain with the district judge.