Reported / Citable
Background
Jorge Guerrero-Martinez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 9, 2026, to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge for the plea proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After being advised that he could have the district judge take his plea, Guerrero-Martinez consented to proceeding before the magistrate judge. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry into the United States.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Guerrero-Martinez understood the charge, potential penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge also found that Guerrero-Martinez was competent, that his plea was free and voluntary, and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge found Guerrero-Martinez guilty of the charge to which he pleaded and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were given 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- Guerrero-Martinez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the plea complied with Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation remains subject to review by the district judge, who will conduct sentencing.
Why It Matters
The findings document the Rule 11 safeguards required before a federal felony guilty plea may be accepted, including competency, voluntariness, understanding of rights and penalties, and a sufficient factual basis.
The recommendation also preserves the district judge’s role in accepting the plea, entering judgment, and imposing sentence, while notifying the parties of the deadline and consequences for failing to object.