United States v. Roa-Jimenez — Magistrate judge recommends accepting illegal-reentry guilty plea

Reported / Citable

Background

Gary Javier Roa-Jimenez appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge and pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Count One of the indictment. The count charged illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1).

Roa-Jimenez consented to entering his plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the required Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 inquiry.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge found that Roa-Jimenez understood the charge, his trial rights, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, the potential penalties, the advisory Sentencing Guidelines, and the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The court also found that he understood the plea agreement, including its waiver of his right to appeal or collaterally attack the conviction or sentence imposed by the district judge.

The court found that Roa-Jimenez was competent to enter a plea, that his plea was knowing and voluntary, and that a factual basis supported it. The magistrate judge therefore recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.

Key Takeaways

• The report and recommendation does not itself finally accept the plea; acceptance and sentencing remain with the presiding district judge.
• The Rule 11 findings included Roa-Jimenez’s competency to enter a plea, his understanding of the plea’s consequences, and the existence of a factual basis.
• The notice states that failure to file written objections before sentencing may bar de novo determination by the district judge and shall bar appellate review of factual findings that the district judge accepts or adopts.

Why It Matters

The recommendation documents the safeguards used to determine whether an illegal-reentry guilty plea was informed and voluntary. It also identifies the appeal and collateral-review waiver as a term Roa-Jimenez understood before entering the plea.

Because the document is a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the procedural distinction is important: the district judge must still decide whether to accept the plea and enter judgment.