Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Reyes-Sanchez — Magistrate judge recommends accepting guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Nicolas Reyes-Sanchez
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Judge
Joseph A. Cordova
Date Decided
August 27, 2026
Docket No.
DR:26-CR-02153(1)-AM
Topics
Illegal reentry; Guilty plea; Rule 11; Magistrate judge recommendation

Background

Nicolas Reyes-Sanchez appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova for entry of a felony guilty plea. The case had been referred under a general order for the magistrate judge to take the plea.

After being advised of his right to have the plea taken by the district judge and receiving the required Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 admonishments, Reyes-Sanchez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to Count One: illegal reentry into the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Reyes-Sanchez knowingly and voluntarily waived his constitutional and statutory rights, understood the charge and potential penalties, and was competent to plead guilty. The court also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea.

The magistrate judge found Reyes-Sanchez guilty of the charged offense and recommended that Chief U.S. District Judge Alia Moses accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt. Sentencing was referred to the presiding district judge.

Key Takeaways

  • Reyes-Sanchez pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
  • The magistrate judge concluded that the Rule 11 plea colloquy established a knowing, voluntary, and factually supported plea.
  • The filing is a findings-and-recommendation document; acceptance of the plea and entry of judgment remain subject to district-court action.

Why It Matters

The recommendation clears the case for the district judge to accept the guilty plea and proceed to sentencing. The parties have 14 days to object; absent timely objections, review of unobjected-to findings is limited as stated in the notice.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top