Reported / Citable
Background
Miguel Francisco-Jose was charged in Count One of an indictment with illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres and pleaded guilty under a plea agreement.
Francisco-Jose consented to enter his plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge. The plea agreement included a waiver of his right to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction or sentence.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 colloquy, Judge Torres found that Francisco-Jose understood the charge, trial rights, possible penalties, immigration consequences, advisory Guidelines framework, and the terms of his plea agreement.
The magistrate judge further found that Francisco-Jose was competent and that his plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. Judge Torres recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.
Key Takeaways
- This was a report and recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea or sentencing decision.
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
- Failure to object in writing before sentencing may bar de novo review and appellate review of adopted factual findings.
Why It Matters
The recommendation clears the case for the district judge to decide whether to accept the plea and later impose sentence. It also underscores that a defendant’s consent to magistrate-judge plea proceedings remains subject to final district-court approval.