Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

USA v. Lopez-Hernandez — magistrate judge recommends accepting guilty plea

Reported / Citable

Case
USA v. Raul Lopez-Hernandez
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division
Judge
MIGUEL A. TORRES
Date Decided
July 22, 2026
Docket No.
3:26-cr-01567
Topics
Guilty plea; Rule 11; Immigration offenses

Background

Raul Lopez-Hernandez appeared with counsel before a magistrate judge and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment. The count charged false personation in immigration matters under 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a).

Lopez-Hernandez consented to enter his plea before the magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.

The Court’s Holding

After conducting the required Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 admonishments, Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres found that Lopez-Hernandez understood the charge, his trial rights, the possible penalties, the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines, and the immigration consequences of his plea.

The magistrate judge further found that Lopez-Hernandez was competent and that his plea was free, knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis. The judge recommended that the district judge accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt.

Key Takeaways

  • The report is a recommendation, not the district judge’s final acceptance of the plea or sentence.
  • The magistrate judge found compliance with Rule 11 and a factual basis for the § 1546(a) plea.
  • Written objections before sentencing may be necessary to preserve review of factual findings adopted by the district judge.

Why It Matters

The decision documents the Rule 11 findings supporting a guilty plea in an immigration-document offense prosecution. It also preserves the district judge’s role in final plea acceptance and sentencing.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top