Reported / Citable
Background
Kensil Estanlis Valle-Torres appeared with counsel before a U.S. magistrate judge on July 10, 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).
After being advised that he could have the district judge take his plea, Valle-Torres 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 Valle-Torres 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 Valle-Torres was competent to plead guilty; and that the plea had a sufficient factual basis.
The magistrate judge found Valle-Torres guilty of the charge to which he pleaded and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing, and the parties were given 14 days to object to the findings and recommendation.
Key Takeaways
- Valle-Torres pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge concluded that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was supported by a sufficient factual basis.
- The recommendation remained subject to district-court review, and sentencing was reserved for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation documents the required findings supporting a valid federal felony guilty plea taken by a magistrate judge with the defendant’s consent. It also preserves the district judge’s role in accepting the recommended disposition and conducting sentencing.