Reported / Citable
Background
Ruben Col-Toz was charged by indictment with illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On September 23, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres and pleaded guilty.
Col-Toz consented to entering his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. During the plea hearing, the magistrate judge advised him of the rights, consequences, potential penalties, immigration consequences, and sentencing considerations associated with his plea, as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Col-Toz was competent and understood the charge, his trial rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the possible penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines. The judge also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force.
Concluding that Col-Toz entered the plea freely, knowingly, and voluntarily and that a factual basis supported it, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Col-Toz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain with the presiding district judge, and objections to the report must be filed before sentencing to preserve review.
Why It Matters
The report documents the procedural safeguards required before a federal court may accept a guilty plea, including confirmation that the defendant understands the charge, waived rights, potential sentence, and immigration consequences.
It also underscores the limited role of the magistrate judge in this proceeding: the judge conducted the plea colloquy and issued a recommendation, while final approval and sentencing were reserved for the district judge.