Reported / Citable
Background
Enrique Arreola-Saenz was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He and his counsel appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres on September 23, 2026, and Arreola-Saenz consented to enter his guilty plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.
During the plea proceeding, the magistrate judge advised Arreola-Saenz of the rights he would relinquish by pleading guilty, the nature of the charge, the immigration consequences of the plea, and the potential penalties. The court also explained that the sentencing judge would consider the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Arreola-Saenz was competent and that his guilty plea was free, knowing, and voluntary. The judge further found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, or force and that a factual basis supported it.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept Arreola-Saenz’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
- Arreola-Saenz 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 supported by a factual basis.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain with the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents the Rule 11 safeguards used to ensure that a defendant understands the charge, possible penalties, immigration consequences, trial rights, and sentencing framework before pleading guilty. It also preserves the distinction between a magistrate judge’s recommendation and the district judge’s final action.