Reported / Citable
Background
Ernesto RAYO-Herrera appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 7, 2026, to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge under a general order and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After being advised that he could have his plea taken by the district judge, RAYO-Herrera consented to proceed 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 RAYO-Herrera understood the charge, possible penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge also found that the plea was knowing and voluntary, that RAYO-Herrera was competent to plead guilty, and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
The magistrate judge found RAYO-Herrera guilty of the charge 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
- RAYO-Herrera pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation remained subject to district-court review, with sentencing reserved for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards required before acceptance of a felony guilty plea, including confirmation of the defendant’s competence, understanding, voluntariness, waiver of rights, and the factual basis for the plea. It also preserves the district judge’s role in accepting the recommendation and conducting sentencing.