Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

USA v. Baltazar-Martinez — Magistrate Judge recommends acceptance of guilty plea to illegal re-entry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Pablo Baltazar-Martinez
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Del Rio Division
Judge
MATTHEW H. WATTERS (Judges of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, 2023)
Date Decided
June 11, 2026
Docket No.
2:26-cr-01284(1)-EG
Topics
Immigration, Criminal Procedure, Illegal Re-entry, Guilty Plea
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Pablo Baltazar-Martinez was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States under Count One of an indictment in the Western District of Texas. On June 11, 2026, the defendant appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters with his counsel for purposes of entering a guilty plea. The defendant was advised of his right to have the plea taken by a district judge and was admonished regarding the protections afforded under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.

The Court’s Holding

Magistrate Judge Watters found that Baltazar-Martinez, with the advice of counsel, consented to have his plea taken by the magistrate judge rather than a district judge. The court found that the defendant understood the nature of the charges and penalties, understood his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely and voluntarily waived them. The defendant entered an unconditional guilty plea to Count One—illegal re-entry into the United States—without any plea agreement.

The magistrate judge found the defendant competent to enter the guilty plea and determined there was a sufficient factual basis for the plea. Based on these findings, Judge Watters recommended that the defendant’s guilty plea be accepted and that a judgment of guilt be entered. The magistrate judge noted the defendant may be subject to restitution and referred the case to the presiding district judge for sentencing.

Key Takeaways

  • The defendant entered an unconditional guilty plea without a plea agreement, indicating he did so based solely on his own decision after consultation with counsel.
  • The magistrate judge made specific findings regarding the defendant’s competency, understanding of rights, and the voluntariness of the plea, satisfying Rule 11 requirements.
  • Sentencing will be conducted by the district judge; this document constitutes only a recommendation to accept the plea, subject to any objections filed within 14 days.

Why It Matters

This case reflects the procedural handling of federal criminal guilty pleas in immigration-related prosecutions. The detailed findings regarding plea voluntariness and the defendant’s understanding of rights ensure compliance with constitutional requirements and provide a record that limits appellate review to plain error for issues not objected to within 14 days.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top