Reported / Citable
Background
Juan Bernardo Galarza appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge and pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Counts Two and Three of the indictment. Both counts charged transporting aliens resulting in death, and aiding and abetting, under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and 1324(a)(1)(B)(iv), and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Galarza consented to enter his plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the required Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 admonishments.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Galarza understood the charges, the possible penalties, the plea agreement, and the rights he was giving up by pleading guilty. The judge also found that he understood the agreement’s appeal and collateral-attack waiver and that he had been advised of immigration consequences.
The report concluded that Galarza was competent and that his plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. It therefore recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- This was a report and recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision.
- The recommendation covers guilty pleas to two counts of transporting aliens resulting in death and aiding and abetting.
- Written objections filed before sentencing may be necessary to preserve de novo review and appellate review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents a completed Rule 11 plea colloquy and clears the case for the district judge to decide whether to accept the plea and proceed to sentencing. It also underscores the consequences of the defendant’s plea-agreement waiver and the need to timely object to the magistrate judge’s findings.