Reported / Citable
Background
Hugo Alberto Hernandez-Aguilera was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States under Count One of an indictment in the Western District of Texas. The case proceeded to a guilty plea hearing before United States Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters on June 11, 2026. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3), the Magistrate Judge conducted the plea colloquy and prepared findings of fact and a recommendation for the District Court.
The defendant appeared with counsel and was informed of his right to have his plea taken by the District Judge. The Magistrate Judge conducted a Rule 11 colloquy to ensure compliance with Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requirements for accepting guilty pleas.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge found that the defendant, with advice of counsel, voluntarily consented to the taking of his guilty plea before the Magistrate Judge, with sentencing to be conducted by the presiding District Judge. The court found that Hernandez-Aguilera understood the nature of the charges and penalties, understood his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely and voluntarily waived those rights.
The court found the guilty plea was entered freely and voluntarily, that the defendant was competent to enter the plea, and that there was sufficient factual basis for the plea. Notably, the plea was entered without any plea agreement. The Magistrate Judge therefore recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and that judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant. The court also noted that the defendant may be subject to restitution.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant’s guilty plea to illegal re-entry accepted after Magistrate Judge found compliance with Rule 11 requirements.
- Plea was entered without a plea agreement, making it an uncontested admission to the charged offense.
- Magistrate Judge found the plea voluntary, with defendant fully understanding charges and constitutional rights waived.
- Sentencing will be conducted by the District Judge; defendant faces potential restitution.
Why It Matters
This case represents a routine guilty plea acceptance in illegal re-entry prosecutions, which are common in border district courts. The Magistrate Judge’s detailed findings establish a complete record for sentencing, documenting that the defendant’s admission was knowing and voluntary, which protects the conviction from appellate challenge on voluntariness grounds.
The procedure followed here—with the Magistrate taking the plea but the District Judge conducting sentencing—is standard in many federal districts and ensures judicial economy while maintaining judicial oversight of the sentencing phase.