Reported / Citable
Background
Karina Raquel Roque-Corea 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 for the taking of the plea.
After being advised that she had the right to have the district judge take her plea, Roque-Corea consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. She 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 Roque-Corea understood the charge, potential penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights she was waiving. The judge also found that she was competent, that her plea was knowing and voluntary, and that a sufficient factual basis supported it.
The magistrate judge found Roque-Corea guilty of the charge and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The matter was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were advised that objections to the findings and recommendation were due within 14 days of receipt.
Key Takeaways
- Roque-Corea 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 an adequate factual basis.
- The recommendation was not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea; sentencing remained before the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal felony guilty plea may be accepted, including competency, voluntariness, knowledge of the charge and consequences, waiver of rights, and a sufficient factual basis.
It also preserves the distinction between the magistrate judge’s role in conducting the plea proceeding and recommending acceptance and the district judge’s role in entering judgment and imposing sentence.