Reported / Citable
Background
Victor Perez-Rojas was indicted in the Western District of Texas on one count of illegal reentry into the United States. The case was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters pursuant to a general order and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3), which permits a magistrate judge to conduct felony guilty plea proceedings with the defendant’s consent.
On May 22, 2026, Perez-Rojas appeared before Magistrate Judge Watters with counsel. The magistrate judge personally addressed the defendant in open court, informed him of his right to have the plea taken by the district judge, and administered the full Rule 11 colloquy required by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Perez-Rojas, with the advice of counsel, consented to the magistrate judge taking his plea. He entered a guilty plea to Count One of the Indictment — illegal reentry — without a plea agreement.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Watters issued Findings of Fact and a Recommendation on May 26, 2026, finding that the guilty plea was constitutionally and procedurally sound. The magistrate found that Perez-Rojas understood the charges and applicable penalties, knowingly and voluntarily waived his constitutional and statutory rights, was competent to enter the plea, and that a sufficient factual basis existed to support the guilty plea.
The magistrate judge recommended that Chief U.S. District Judge Alia Moses accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt against Perez-Rojas. The defendant was also found to acknowledge potential liability for restitution. Sentencing was referred to the presiding district judge. The parties were notified that any objections to the recommendation must be filed within 14 days or risk waiving de novo district court review.
Key Takeaways
- Perez-Rojas pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under Count One of the Indictment with no plea agreement in place.
- The magistrate judge conducted the Rule 11 colloquy and found all prerequisites for a valid guilty plea satisfied, including voluntariness, competency, and a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation is non-final; the parties have 14 days to object before Chief Judge Moses acts on it.
Why It Matters
This routine but illustrative proceeding reflects the standard procedural framework for federal illegal reentry prosecutions in the Del Rio Division, a high-volume border court. The referral to a magistrate judge for the plea colloquy under § 636(b)(3) — with sentencing reserved for the Article III judge — is a common efficiency mechanism in districts along the southern border.
Because no plea agreement was entered, the district judge retains full discretion at sentencing, including application of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Defense counsel and prosecutors in similar cases should note the 14-day objection window to the magistrate’s recommendation, as failure to object forfeits de novo review and limits appellate challenge to plain error under Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996).