Reported / Citable
Background
Carlos Roberto Santos-Argueta was charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The felony guilty-plea proceeding was referred by general order to a U.S. magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
On June 29, 2026, Santos-Argueta appeared with counsel and consented to have the magistrate judge take his plea. After receiving the advisements required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, he pleaded guilty to Count One without a plea agreement.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Santos-Argueta understood the charge, potential penalties, and rights he was waiving; was competent to plead; and entered his plea freely and voluntarily. The judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and noted that Santos-Argueta acknowledged he could be subject to restitution.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge 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
- Santos-Argueta pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, competent, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The ruling was a recommendation to the district judge, who retained responsibility for accepting the plea, entering judgment, and imposing sentence.
Why It Matters
The findings document the procedural safeguards supporting the validity of Santos-Argueta’s guilty plea. They also preserve the distinction between the magistrate judge’s role in conducting the plea proceeding and the district judge’s authority to act on the recommendation and conduct sentencing.