Reported / Citable
Background
Jose Alberto Arroyo-Sotelo was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On August 4, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres and pleaded guilty to the indictment.
Arroyo-Sotelo consented to enter his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to the presiding district judge’s final approval and sentencing. During the plea proceeding, the magistrate judge provided the admonishments required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Arroyo-Sotelo was competent and that his plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The judge also found that Arroyo-Sotelo understood the charge, his trial rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the possible penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the 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
- Arroyo-Sotelo pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge concluded that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain with the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards used to ensure that Arroyo-Sotelo validly waived his trial rights, including confirmation that he understood the plea’s immigration and sentencing consequences.
It also preserves the distinction between a magistrate judge’s recommendation after conducting a plea proceeding and the district judge’s authority to grant final approval and enter judgment.