Reported / Citable
Background
Nicholas Da Silva Xavier was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres and consented to enter his guilty plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.
After conducting the plea colloquy required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, the magistrate judge found that Da Silva Xavier understood the charge, his trial and constitutional rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the potential penalties, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Da Silva Xavier was competent and that his guilty plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The court also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force.
Based on those findings, 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 a sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Da Silva Xavier 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 factually supported.
- 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 the specified review rights.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards used when a defendant consents to plead guilty before a magistrate judge. It confirms that Da Silva Xavier was advised of his rights, sentencing exposure, and immigration consequences before entering the plea.
Because the filing is a report and recommendation rather than a final judgment, the district judge must still decide whether to accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt.