Reported / Citable
Background
Guillermo Lariz-Perez was charged in Count One of an indictment with illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On September 24, 2026, Lariz-Perez and counsel appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert F. Castaneda for a guilty-plea hearing.
Lariz-Perez consented to enter his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 colloquy and advised Lariz-Perez of his trial rights, the charge, immigration consequences, possible penalties, the advisory Sentencing Guidelines, and the court’s sentencing obligations.
The Court’s Holding
Judge Castaneda found that Lariz-Perez was competent and understood the oath, his right to plead not guilty and proceed to a jury trial, the rights he would waive by pleading guilty, and the consequences of the plea. The court also found that defense counsel had explained the plea’s immigration consequences.
The magistrate judge further found that the plea was free, knowing, voluntary, and not induced by promises, threats, or force, and that a factual basis supported it. The report therefore recommended that the district judge accept Lariz-Perez’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- The ruling is a report and recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision.
- The recommended plea concerns illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- Objections to the report must be filed before sentencing; failure to do so may bar de novo review and appellate review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents a completed Rule 11 plea colloquy and clears the case for the district judge’s final plea acceptance and sentencing. It also underscores that a defendant who pleads before a magistrate judge may preserve objections to the report only by raising them before sentencing.