Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Arita-Castro — Magistrate judge recommended accepting guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Elder Noe Arita-Castro
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division
Judge
Laura Enriquez, United States Magistrate Judge
Date Decided
August 11, 2026
Docket No.
EP:26-CR-01860(1)-KC
Topics
Illegal Reentry; Guilty Plea; Rule 11; Immigration

Background

Elder Noe Arita-Castro was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On August 11, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty to the indictment.

Arita-Castro consented to enter his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the plea proceeding under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and advised him of his trial rights, the charge, possible penalties, immigration consequences, and the role of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Arita-Castro was competent and that his plea was free, knowing, and voluntary. She also found that he understood the rights he was giving up, the nature and consequences of the charge, and the potential sentence, and that no promises, threats, force, or threats of force induced the plea.

Finding a factual basis for the guilty plea, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea, adjudicate guilt, or impose a sentence.

Key Takeaways

  • Arita-Castro pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
  • The magistrate judge found that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
  • Acceptance of the plea, entry of judgment, and sentencing remain for the presiding district judge.

Why It Matters

The recommendation records the procedural findings needed before the district judge may accept the guilty plea. It also confirms that Arita-Castro was advised of the plea’s immigration consequences and of the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines.

The parties were warned that failing to object to the report before sentencing may bar de novo review by the district judge and appellate review of factual findings later accepted or adopted by that judge.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top