Reported / Citable
Background
Antony Leonel NUNES-Arias appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 7, 2026, 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) and United States v. Dees.
After being advised that he had the right to have a district judge take his plea, NUNES-Arias consented to proceeding before the magistrate judge. He then pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry into the United States.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that NUNES-Arias understood the charge, possible penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge also found that the plea was knowing, free, and voluntary; that NUNES-Arias was competent; and that a sufficient factual basis supported the plea.
The magistrate judge found NUNES-Arias guilty of the charge to which he pleaded and recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and a judgment of guilt entered. The case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were advised that they had 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- NUNES-Arias pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found that the Rule 11 requirements were satisfied and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation calls for acceptance of the plea and entry of judgment, with sentencing to be conducted by the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The findings document the safeguards applied when a magistrate judge takes a felony guilty plea, including the defendant’s consent, Rule 11 admonishments, competency, voluntariness, and a sufficient factual basis.
The recommendation also preserves the parties’ opportunity to file timely objections before the case proceeds to sentencing.