Reported / Citable
Background
Rigoberto Ramos-Ramos appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for the taking of a felony guilty plea, pursuant to a general referral order. Ramos-Ramos consented to having the magistrate judge take his plea; sentencing remains assigned to the presiding district judge.
After receiving Rule 11 admonishments, Ramos-Ramos 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
The magistrate judge found that Ramos-Ramos understood the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights, and that he knowingly, freely, and voluntarily waived those rights. The court also found him competent to plead and found an adequate factual basis for the plea.
The magistrate judge found Ramos-Ramos guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district court accept the plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The recommendation also noted that Ramos-Ramos may be subject to restitution and advised the parties that objections are due within 14 days.
Key Takeaways
- Ramos-Ramos pleaded guilty to Count One without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the plea compliant with Rule 11, voluntary, competent, and supported by a factual basis.
- The district judge must act on the recommendation; sentencing remains before the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The filing is a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, not a final district-court acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision. Unless timely objections are filed, unobjected-to findings accepted by the district court generally receive only plain-error review on appeal.