Reported / Citable
Background
Anggie Naomi Feijoo-Armijos appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge in the El Paso Division and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment. The count charged improper use of another person’s passport, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1544.
Feijoo-Armijos consented to entering her plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The magistrate judge conducted the plea colloquy required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found that Feijoo-Armijos understood the charge, the rights she was waiving, the possible penalties, the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines, and the immigration consequences of her plea. The court also found her competent and determined that her plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.
Based on those findings, Magistrate Judge Robert F. Castaneda recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report did not itself finally accept the plea or impose sentence.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty to improper use of another’s passport under 18 U.S.C. § 1544.
- The magistrate judge found the Rule 11 requirements satisfied and the plea voluntary and factually supported.
- The recommendation remains subject to the district judge’s final approval and sentencing.
Why It Matters
The report preserves the distinction between a magistrate judge’s plea recommendation and the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea and sentencing decision. It also warns that failing to object in writing before sentencing may bar de novo review and appellate review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.