Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Milan-Rumiguano — magistrate judge recommends accepting guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Maria Narcisa Milan-Rumiguano
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Del Rio Division
Judge
Joseph A. Cordova
Date Decided
August 25, 2026
Docket No.
DR:26-CR-01739(1)-EG
Topics
criminal procedure; guilty plea; illegal reentry; magistrate judge

Background

Maria Narcisa Milan-Rumiguano appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova for a felony guilty-plea proceeding referred under a general order. She consented to having the magistrate judge take her plea; sentencing remains before U.S. District Judge Ernest Gonzalez.

After Rule 11 admonishments, Milan-Rumiguano pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to Count One, illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

The Court’s Holding

Judge Cordova found that Milan-Rumiguano understood the charge, penalties, and her rights; knowingly and voluntarily waived her rights; was competent; and entered her plea freely and voluntarily.

The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea and found her guilty of the charged offense. He recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.

Key Takeaways

  • This was a recommendation, not a final district-court acceptance of the plea.
  • The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 without a plea agreement.
  • Parties have 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.

Why It Matters

The order records the Rule 11 findings supporting the guilty plea while preserving the district judge’s role in accepting the recommendation and imposing sentence. Absent timely objections, review of unobjected-to findings may be limited on appeal.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top