Reported / Citable
Background
Defendant Samuel Antonio Calderon-Quintanilla appeared before a U.S. Magistrate Judge on July 14, 2026, and entered a plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment. The charge was Conspiracy to Possess a Controlled Substance with the Intent to Distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 841(b)(1)(A)(ii). This plea was made pursuant to a Plea Agreement reached with the prosecution.
Following the plea hearing, the Magistrate Judge conducted an admonishment of the Defendant as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. During this process, the judge made a series of findings regarding the Defendant’s understanding of the proceedings, his rights, and the consequences of his guilty plea.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, finding that the Defendant’s guilty plea was freely, knowingly, and voluntarily made, and that there was a factual basis to support the plea. The Magistrate Judge meticulously detailed that the Defendant understood his rights, including the right to a trial and representation by counsel, and the immigration consequences and maximum possible penalties associated with the charge.
Crucially, the Magistrate Judge also found that the Defendant fully understood the terms of the Plea Agreement, including his waiver of the right to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction or sentence. Based on these findings, the Magistrate Judge recommended to the District Judge that the Defendant’s plea of guilty be accepted and that a judgment of guilt be entered in the case.
Key Takeaways
- A Magistrate Judge conducted a Rule 11 hearing for a defendant entering a guilty plea for drug conspiracy.
- The Magistrate Judge found that the defendant’s plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
- The defendant understood the charges, potential penalties, immigration consequences, and the terms of his plea agreement, including the waiver of appellate rights.
- The Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Why It Matters
This report and recommendation highlights the procedural steps involved when a defendant enters a guilty plea in federal court, particularly the role of a Magistrate Judge in ensuring the plea is knowing and voluntary. It demonstrates the judicial scrutiny applied to plea agreements to safeguard a defendant’s constitutional rights.
For attorneys, it underscores the importance of the Rule 11 colloquy and the detailed findings a court must make before accepting a guilty plea. It also reminds practitioners of the advisory nature of Sentencing Guidelines and the impact of waivers of appeal rights, which are standard components of many plea agreements.