Reported / Citable
Background
Yony Alfredo Villatoro-Hernandez was indicted for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). On October 15, 2026, he appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty to the indictment.
Villatoro-Hernandez consented to entering his plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. During the Rule 11 proceeding, the magistrate judge advised him of his trial rights, the charge and possible penalties, the immigration consequences of pleading guilty, and the advisory role of the Sentencing Guidelines.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Villatoro-Hernandez was competent and that his guilty plea was free, knowing, and voluntary. The court also found that the plea was not induced by promises, threats, force, or threats of force, and that a factual basis supported the plea.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept Villatoro-Hernandez’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report and recommendation did not itself finally accept the plea or impose a sentence.
Key Takeaways
- The magistrate judge found that the defendant’s illegal-reentry plea satisfied Rule 11.
- The defendant understood his trial rights, potential penalties, immigration consequences, and the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines.
- Final acceptance of the plea and sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
Why It Matters
The report documents the findings necessary to establish that the guilty plea was supported by a factual basis and entered competently, knowingly, and voluntarily. It also preserves the distinction between a magistrate judge’s recommendation after conducting the plea proceeding and the district judge’s authority to give final approval and impose sentence.