Reported / Citable
Background
Miguel Angel Pacheco-Preciado was charged with illegal re-entry into the United States under federal law. The case was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for taking a felony guilty plea pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3). On June 11, 2026, the defendant appeared in court with counsel and entered a guilty plea to Count One of the indictment—illegal re-entry—without a plea agreement.
The magistrate judge conducted a Rule 11 colloquy, personally addressing the defendant in open court and admonishing him regarding his rights. The magistrate judge also informed the defendant of his right to have the plea taken by the district judge before proceeding.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge found, after thorough colloquy and examination, that the defendant’s guilty plea was made freely and voluntarily with full understanding of the nature of the charges and applicable penalties. The court found that the defendant understood his constitutional and statutory rights and freely waived them with the advice of counsel. The defendant was found to be competent to enter the guilty plea.
The magistrate judge further found there was sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea and entered a finding of guilt on Count One. The magistrate judge recommended that the defendant’s guilty plea be accepted and that judgment of guilt be entered. The case was referred to the presiding district judge for sentencing. The court noted that the defendant may be subject to restitution.
Key Takeaways
- Magistrate judges may take felony guilty pleas under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3) with de novo sentencing review by the district judge.
- Rule 11 requires personal allocution and admonishment to ensure the guilty plea is knowing, voluntary, and supported by adequate factual basis.
- A defendant who pleads guilty without a plea agreement remains subject to statutory penalties for the offense.
- Objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days for de novo review, or they are waived except on grounds of plain error on appeal.
Why It Matters
This case demonstrates the federal procedural framework for accepting guilty pleas in criminal cases. The Rule 11 colloquy protects defendants’ constitutional rights by ensuring pleas are truly voluntary and informed, not coerced or unknowing. For immigration crimes like illegal re-entry, which carry felony penalties, proper procedure is critical to prevent later claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or constitutional violation.
The delegation to magistrate judges streamlines federal criminal dockets while preserving district judge authority over sentencing. However, parties retain the right to object and obtain de novo review by the district judge within 14 days, ensuring meaningful oversight of the guilty plea process.