Reported / Citable
Background
Daniela Jimena Marcos-Arroyo appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment. The count charges illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
Marcos-Arroyo consented to enter her plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The plea agreement included a waiver of the right to appeal or collaterally attack the conviction or sentence.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 plea colloquy, the magistrate judge found that Marcos-Arroyo understood her trial rights, the charge, the immigration consequences of the plea, the possible penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.
The magistrate judge further found that Marcos-Arroyo was competent and that her plea was free, knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The report therefore recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- The recommendation concerns a guilty plea to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied, including a factual basis and a voluntary plea.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain for the district judge.
Why It Matters
The report preserves the magistrate judge’s Rule 11 findings for the district judge’s review while leaving final adjudication and sentencing to the district court. It also warns that objections not filed before sentencing may forfeit de novo review and appellate review of factual findings later accepted or adopted by the district judge.