Reported / Citable
Background
Fausto Hernandez-Mercado appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge David B. Fannin to plead guilty to Count Two of the indictment, which charged a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (B)(i). The district court had referred the plea and allocution proceedings to the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
Hernandez-Mercado signed a written consent to proceed before the magistrate judge and entered a plea agreement with the government. An interpreter assisted him during the proceeding.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the plea colloquy required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, the magistrate judge found Hernandez-Mercado competent and capable of entering an informed plea. The judge further found that Hernandez-Mercado understood the charge and the consequences of pleading guilty, that his plea was knowing and voluntary, and that an independent factual basis supported every essential element of the offense.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district court accept the plea agreement and guilty plea and finally adjudge Hernandez-Mercado guilty. This was a report and recommendation, not a final adjudication or sentence; the district court retained responsibility for final approval and sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- The magistrate judge found that Hernandez-Mercado’s felony guilty plea complied with Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
- Hernandez-Mercado was advised that the offense carried up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, up to three years of supervised release, and a mandatory $100 assessment, with a possible additional $5,000 assessment if he is found nonindigent.
- The parties had 14 days after service to file specific written objections; failure to do so could limit district-court and appellate review.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the procedural safeguards surrounding Hernandez-Mercado’s felony plea, including his consent to proceed before a magistrate judge, his understanding of the potential punishment and immigration consequences, and the existence of a factual basis for the plea.
Because the filing is only a recommendation, it does not itself accept the plea, enter a final judgment of guilt, or impose a sentence. Those decisions remain with the district court.