Reported / Citable
Background
Marco Antonio Mendez-Alvarado appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for a felony guilty-plea proceeding. The case had been referred to the magistrate judge by general order for the taking of the plea.
Mendez-Alvarado consented to having the magistrate judge take his plea. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment charging illegal reentry into the United States. Sentencing was reserved for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 colloquy, the magistrate judge found that Mendez-Alvarado understood the charge, penalties, and rights he was waiving; that he was competent; and that his plea was knowing, free, and voluntary.
The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found Mendez-Alvarado guilty of the charged offense. The court recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied and a factual basis for the plea.
- The recommendation remained subject to objections and acceptance by the district judge.
Why It Matters
The filing illustrates the magistrate-judge role in felony plea proceedings: with the defendant’s consent, the magistrate judge may conduct the Rule 11 hearing and recommend acceptance, while the district judge retains responsibility for sentencing.
Parties had 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation; failure to do so could limit later review.