Reported / Citable
Background
Honorio Perez-Castro appeared with counsel before Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for a felony guilty-plea proceeding. The matter had been referred under a general order for the taking of the plea.
Perez-Castro consented to having the magistrate judge conduct the plea proceeding after being advised that he could have his plea taken by a district judge. He pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One of the indictment, charging a false statement or representation to an agency or department of the United States.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 colloquy, the magistrate judge found that Perez-Castro understood the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights, which he freely and voluntarily waived. The court also found him competent and concluded that a sufficient factual basis supported the plea.
The magistrate judge found Perez-Castro guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. Sentencing was referred to the presiding district judge.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant entered a guilty plea to Count One without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the plea knowing, voluntary, and supported by an adequate factual basis.
- The recommendation remains subject to objections and district-court review before acceptance and sentencing.
Why It Matters
The filing reflects completion of the plea-stage Rule 11 process and recommends acceptance of Perez-Castro’s guilty plea. It does not impose sentence; sentencing remains for the district judge after any objections to the recommendation are resolved.