Reported / Citable
Background
Ariel Escamilla-Ramos appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Cordova for a felony guilty-plea proceeding referred under a general order. The magistrate judge advised Escamilla-Ramos of his right to have the plea taken by a district judge and gave the required Rule 11 admonishments.
Escamilla-Ramos consented to the magistrate judge’s taking of his plea and pleaded guilty, without a plea agreement, to Count One: illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Sentencing was reserved for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Escamilla-Ramos understood the charge, penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights; voluntarily waived those rights; was competent; and entered his plea freely and voluntarily. The magistrate judge also found a sufficient factual basis for the plea.
Based on those findings, the magistrate judge found Escamilla-Ramos guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The recommendation remained subject to objections and district-court review.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty without a plea agreement to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 plea requirements satisfied.
- The document recommends acceptance of the plea; sentencing is for the district judge.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the magistrate-judge role in felony plea proceedings when the defendant consents, while preserving the district judge’s role in sentencing and final consideration of the recommendation.