Reported / Citable
Background
Sandro Eric CANTU-Cano was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States. On June 11, 2026, he appeared before United States Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters for the taking of a felony guilty plea. The magistrate informed the defendant of his right to have the plea taken by the district judge and admonished him of his rights under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The defendant, represented by counsel, consented to the magistrate taking his plea. He entered a guilty plea to Count One of the Indictment charging illegal re-entry into the United States. Notably, the defendant pled guilty without a plea agreement.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate found that the defendant’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. The defendant understood the nature of the charges and the penalties involved, and he freely and voluntarily waived his constitutional and statutory rights after advice of counsel. The magistrate determined that the defendant was competent to enter the plea and that there was a sufficient factual basis for his admission of guilt.
Based on these findings, the magistrate recommended that the defendant’s guilty plea be accepted and that a judgment of guilt be entered. The magistrate noted that the defendant may be subject to restitution. Sentencing will be conducted by the presiding United States District Judge. The parties have 14 days from receipt to file objections for de novo review; failure to do so bars appellate challenge except on grounds of plain error.
Key Takeaways
- Defendant pled guilty to federal illegal re-entry charge without a plea agreement
- Magistrate found the plea was knowing, voluntary, and had sufficient factual basis under Rule 11
- All constitutional rights were properly waived after consultation with counsel
- Sentencing remains pending before the district judge
- Restitution may be imposed as part of the sentence
Why It Matters
This case reflects standard procedures for accepting felony guilty pleas in federal court. The magistrate’s detailed findings—including competency, voluntariness, and factual basis—establish a strong procedural foundation that likely will support the district judge’s acceptance of the plea at sentencing. The guilty plea without a negotiated agreement suggests the defendant accepted responsibility for the offense.
Illegal re-entry prosecutions represent a significant portion of the federal criminal docket, particularly in border districts. Guilty pleas such as this one streamline proceedings while creating a clear factual record for sentencing. For defense counsel, the adequacy of the Rule 11 colloquy and the defendant’s opportunity to understand and contest the charges remain critical safeguards, even in straightforward re-entry cases.