Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Esquivel-Cano — Magistrate judge accepted guilty plea to illegal re-entry into the United States

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Gilberto Esquivel-Cano
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Del Rio Division
Judge
MATTHEW H. WATTERS (Judges of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, 2023)
Date Decided
May 28, 2026
Docket No.
2:26-cr-00950
Topics
Criminal procedure, immigration, guilty plea, illegal re-entry
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Gilberto Esquivel-Cano was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States, a federal felony. On May 28, 2026, a United States Magistrate Judge conducted a hearing to take Esquivel-Cano’s guilty plea pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).

The defendant appeared with counsel. The magistrate personally addressed the defendant in open court, informed him of his right to have the plea taken by a United States District Judge, and provided the standard Rule 11 admonishments regarding his constitutional and statutory rights.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate found that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered his guilty plea to Count One—illegal re-entry into the United States—without a plea agreement. The court determined that Esquivel-Cano understood the nature of the charges and the penalties he faced, understood and freely waived his constitutional and statutory rights, and was competent to enter the plea. The plea was made freely and voluntarily.

The magistrate also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and entered a finding of guilt. The magistrate recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and that judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant. The case was referred to the presiding United States District Judge for sentencing, and the defendant was advised that he may be subject to restitution.

Key Takeaways

  • The defendant pleaded guilty to federal illegal re-entry without a negotiated plea agreement.
  • The magistrate found the defendant’s waiver of rights to be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent under Rule 11.
  • The defendant was informed of his right to have the plea taken by a district judge but consented to the magistrate’s role.
  • Sentencing will be determined by the district judge.

Why It Matters

This case exemplifies the procedural safeguards required under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 for guilty pleas in federal criminal proceedings. The magistrate’s detailed findings ensure that Esquivel-Cano’s plea was constitutionally sound—that is, voluntary, knowing, and made with an understanding of the consequences. This protection is essential in immigration-related prosecutions, where federal felony convictions carry mandatory minimum sentences and collateral consequences including deportation.

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top