Reported / Citable
Background
Francis Merlin Cantor-Garcia was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States under Count One of the indictment. On June 11, 2026, the defendant appeared before Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters in the Western District of Texas, Del Rio Division, with counsel present.
The defendant entered a guilty plea to the re-entry charge without a plea agreement. Before accepting the plea, the magistrate judge conducted an in-court colloquy with the defendant, as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, to ensure the plea was knowing, voluntary, and constitutional.
The Court’s Holding
The Magistrate Judge found that the defendant understood the nature of the charges and penalties, understood his constitutional and statutory rights, and freely and voluntarily waived those rights. The court found the plea was made voluntarily, that the defendant was competent to enter the plea, and that a sufficient factual basis existed for the guilty plea.
Based on these findings, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the guilty plea be accepted and a judgment of guilt be entered against the defendant. The court noted that sentencing will be conducted by the presiding U.S. District Judge, not the magistrate, and advised the defendant that he may be subject to restitution. The case was referred to the district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant entered guilty plea without a plea agreement to illegal re-entry charge
- Magistrate verified compliance with Rule 11 protections: knowing waiver, voluntary plea, competency, and factual basis
- Plea recommendation is subject to 14-day objection period before district court review
- Sentencing phase is separate and will be conducted by the presiding district judge
Why It Matters
This decision illustrates the federal magistrate’s role in accepting felony guilty pleas while ensuring constitutional protections are observed. The emphasis on Rule 11 compliance—confirming the defendant understood charges, penalties, and rights—reflects the judiciary’s gatekeeping function to prevent invalid guilty pleas that might later be challenged on appeal.
For immigration practitioners, the case demonstrates how illegal re-entry charges proceed through federal court in the border regions, with magistrates conducting initial guilty plea proceedings before referral to district judges for sentencing. The lack of a plea agreement may affect sentencing discretion at the district judge level.