Reported / Citable
Background
Julio Cesar Magdaleno-Mendez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge to enter a felony guilty plea. The matter had been referred to the magistrate judge under a general order for the taking of the plea.
After being advised of his right to have the district judge take the plea and receiving the admonishments required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, Magdaleno-Mendez pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment: illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He entered the plea without a plea agreement.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Magdaleno-Mendez understood the charge, potential penalties, and rights he was waiving; was competent to plead guilty; and entered the plea freely and voluntarily. The judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found Magdaleno-Mendez guilty of the charge to which he pleaded.
The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The matter was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were given 14 days after receiving the report to file written objections.
Key Takeaways
- Magdaleno-Mendez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the plea knowing, voluntary, competent, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation was not the sentencing decision; sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The findings document the Rule 11 safeguards supporting the validity of the guilty plea and provide the basis for the district judge to accept it and enter judgment. They also preserve the parties’ opportunity to object before district-court review.