Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Son — Magistrate judge recommended accepting guilty plea

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. David Son
Court
U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
Judge
DAN N. MACLEMORE
Date Decided
July 17, 2026
Docket No.
6:26-cr-00052
Topics
Guilty Plea; Rule 11; Magistrate Judge

Background

David Son appeared with defense counsel before a magistrate judge on July 16, 2026, pursuant to a referral from the district judge. An attorney for the government also appeared, and Son entered a guilty plea on the record.

The magistrate judge personally addressed Son in open court. The judge confirmed that Son was competent, had consented to plead guilty before a magistrate judge, understood the charge and possible penalties, and understood the constitutional and statutory rights he would waive by pleading guilty.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Son’s plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The judge also found that Son was competent to stand trial, understood the charge and penalties, wished to waive his rights, and was satisfied with his attorney’s representation.

Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept Son’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The memorandum and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence.

Key Takeaways

  • Son consented to enter his guilty plea before a magistrate judge.
  • The magistrate judge found that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea had a factual basis.
  • The recommendation is subject to specific written objections filed within 14 days after service.

Why It Matters

The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards supporting Son’s guilty plea and provides the district judge with findings on competency, voluntariness, waiver of rights, and factual basis.

Unless a party timely raises specific objections, the district court may accept the unobjected-to findings without de novo review, and later appellate challenges generally will be limited to plain error.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Scroll to Top