Reported / Citable
Background
Santos Rutilio Barahona-Banegas appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for a felony guilty-plea proceeding referred under a general order. He consented to having the magistrate judge take his plea, while sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
Barahona-Banegas pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment, charging illegal reentry into the United States. The magistrate judge gave the defendant the required Rule 11 admonishments.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Barahona-Banegas understood the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights; voluntarily waived those rights; and was competent to plead guilty. The judge also found that the plea was knowing and voluntary and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
The magistrate judge found Barahona-Banegas guilty of the count to which he pleaded and recommended that the district judge accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The matter was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to illegal reentry.
- The magistrate judge recommended acceptance of the plea after finding Rule 11 compliance and a sufficient factual basis.
- Parties have 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Why It Matters
The filing is a recommendation, not the district court’s final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision. Absent timely objections, the district judge may accept the recommendation, with review consequences outlined in the notice.