Reported / Citable
Background
Noe Antonio Menjivar-Magana was charged in Count One of an indictment with illegal reentry into the United States. The matter was referred by general order to a magistrate judge to take the defendant’s felony guilty plea.
On July 8, 2026, Menjivar-Magana and counsel appeared before Magistrate Judge Matthew H. Watters. Menjivar-Magana, with counsel’s advice, consented to having the magistrate judge conduct the plea proceeding. He pleaded guilty to Count One without a plea agreement; sentencing remained for the presiding district judge.
The Court’s Holding
After conducting the Rule 11 colloquy, the magistrate judge found that Menjivar-Magana understood the charge, penalties, and his constitutional and statutory rights, and that he knowingly, freely, and voluntarily waived those rights. The court also found him competent and concluded that a sufficient factual basis supported the plea.
The magistrate judge found Menjivar-Magana guilty of the charged offense and recommended that the district court accept the guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The recommendation advised the parties that objections must be filed within 14 days and referred the case to the presiding district judge for sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- The defendant pleaded guilty to illegal reentry without a plea agreement.
- The magistrate judge found the plea knowing, voluntary, competent, and supported by an adequate factual basis.
- The document is a recommendation; acceptance of the plea and sentencing remain for the district judge.
Why It Matters
The ruling illustrates the magistrate-judge plea procedure in a felony case: with the defendant’s consent, the magistrate judge may conduct the Rule 11 hearing and recommend acceptance, while the district judge retains responsibility for final disposition and sentencing.
Because the filing is a findings-and-recommendation document, its conclusions are subject to timely objections and district-court review.