Reported / Citable
Background
Olinto Velazquez-Ramirez appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters to enter a felony guilty plea. The case had been referred to the magistrate judge for that purpose under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).
After being advised that he could have the district judge take his plea, Velazquez-Ramirez consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. He 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 Velazquez-Ramirez understood the charge, potential penalties, and the constitutional and statutory rights he was waiving. The judge also found that the defendant was competent, entered the plea freely and voluntarily, and admitted a sufficient factual basis for the plea.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge found Velazquez-Ramirez guilty of the charge and recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The matter 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
- Velazquez-Ramirez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge concluded that the plea satisfied Rule 11’s competency, voluntariness, notice, and factual-basis requirements.
- The recommendation is subject to review by the district judge, who will conduct sentencing.
Why It Matters
The findings document the Rule 11 safeguards supporting the validity of the guilty plea while preserving the district judge’s role in accepting the recommendation and imposing sentence. Any objections must be filed within the specified 14-day period to preserve the stated standards of review.