Reported / Citable
Background
Gustavo Mendez-Hernandez was charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Under a general referral order, the matter came before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A Cordova for the taking of a felony guilty plea.
At a July 2, 2026 hearing, Mendez-Hernandez appeared with counsel and consented to have the magistrate judge take his plea. After receiving the admonishments required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, he pleaded guilty to Count One without a plea agreement.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Mendez-Hernandez understood the charge, potential penalties, and rights he was waiving; was competent to plead; and entered the plea freely and voluntarily. The judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found Mendez-Hernandez 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 notified that they had 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- Mendez-Hernandez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the plea knowing, voluntary, factually supported, and entered by a competent defendant.
- The document is a recommendation to the district judge, who remains responsible for accepting the plea, entering judgment, and conducting sentencing.
Why It Matters
The recommendation records the Rule 11 findings necessary for the district judge to accept Mendez-Hernandez’s felony guilty plea. It also preserves the distinction between the magistrate judge’s role in taking the plea and the district judge’s authority over the final disposition and sentencing.