Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

Castillo-Salas — Magistrate judge recommended accepting the defendant’s guilty plea

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Nestor Castillo-Salas
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division
Judge
Derek T. Gilliland, United States Magistrate Judge
Date Decided
July 28, 2026
Docket No.
6:26-cr-00141-CRW-1
Topics
Guilty Plea; Rule 11; Magistrate Judges

Background

Nestor Castillo-Salas appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Derek T. Gilliland with defense counsel and counsel for the government to enter a guilty plea. The district judge had referred the plea proceeding to the magistrate judge.

In open court, Castillo-Salas consented to pleading guilty before a magistrate judge. Judge Gilliland personally addressed him regarding his competence, the nature of the charge and possible penalties, his constitutional and statutory rights, the consequences of pleading guilty, and the voluntariness of his plea. The judge also examined whether the plea had a factual basis.

The Court’s Holding

Judge Gilliland found that Castillo-Salas was competent to stand trial, understood the charge and penalties, and knowingly wished to waive his constitutional and statutory rights. The judge further found that the plea was free, knowing, and voluntary; that Castillo-Salas was satisfied with counsel’s representation; and that a factual basis supported the plea.

Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. This report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or enter judgment.

Key Takeaways

  • The magistrate judge conducted the plea colloquy required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
  • The court found that Castillo-Salas was competent and that his guilty plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
  • The recommendation remains subject to district-court review, and any objections must be filed within 14 days after service unless the district court modifies that period.

Why It Matters

The report documents the procedural safeguards used before a federal court may accept a guilty plea, including confirmation that the defendant understands the charge, penalties, waived rights, and consequences of the plea.

It also underscores the distinction between a magistrate judge’s recommendation and the district court’s final action: the plea and judgment of guilt were recommended, not conclusively entered by this filing.

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top