Reported / Citable
Background
Mario Alberto Cortes-Aguilar appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge to enter a felony guilty plea. He was advised that he had the right to have a district judge take his plea, but he consented to the magistrate judge conducting the proceeding.
After receiving the required admonishments under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, Cortes-Aguilar pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment charging illegal reentry into the United States. Sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters found that Cortes-Aguilar understood the charge, potential penalties, and rights he was waiving; was competent to plead; and entered the plea freely and voluntarily. The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and stated that Cortes-Aguilar was guilty of the charge to which he pleaded.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The findings and recommendation did not impose a sentence or constitute the district judge’s final acceptance of the recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- Cortes-Aguilar pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11’s competency, voluntariness, and factual-basis requirements.
- The recommendation was referred to the presiding district judge for acceptance and sentencing, and the parties had 14 days to object.
Why It Matters
The decision documents the procedural safeguards required when a magistrate judge takes a felony guilty plea with the defendant’s consent. It also preserves the district judge’s role in acting on the recommendation and conducting sentencing.