Reported / Citable
Background
Jose Luis Landeros-Dominguez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred under a general order for the magistrate judge to take the plea pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After being advised that he could have a district judge take his plea, Landeros-Dominguez consented to proceeding before the magistrate judge. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment: illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Landeros-Dominguez understood the charge, possible penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge further found that the plea was knowing and voluntary, that Landeros-Dominguez was competent, and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The recommendation did not itself constitute the district court’s final acceptance of the plea; the parties were given 14 days to object, and the case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant may consent to having a magistrate judge conduct a felony guilty-plea proceeding.
- Landeros-Dominguez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge recommended acceptance of the plea and entry of judgment, leaving final action and sentencing to the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation illustrates the distinct roles of magistrate and district judges in a referred felony plea proceeding. The magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 inquiry and made findings supporting the plea, but the district court retained responsibility for acting on the recommendation and conducting sentencing.