Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

USA v. Pereira — Magistrate judge recommended accepting guilty plea to illegal reentry

Reported / Citable

Case
United States of America v. Daniele Cristina Pereira
Court
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division
Judge
Laura Enriquez, United States Magistrate Judge
Date Decided
September 21, 2026
Docket No.
EP:26-CR-02218(1)-KC
Topics
Illegal Reentry; Guilty Plea; Rule 11; Immigration Consequences

Background

Daniele Cristina Pereira appeared with counsel before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez and pleaded guilty to Count One of the indictment, which charged illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pereira consented to enter the plea before a magistrate judge, subject to final approval and sentencing by the presiding district judge.

After conducting the plea colloquy required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, the magistrate judge found that Pereira understood the charge, trial rights, immigration consequences, potential penalties, advisory Sentencing Guidelines, and sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The judge also found Pereira competent and determined that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by a factual basis.

The Court’s Holding

The magistrate judge recommended that the district judge accept Pereira’s guilty plea and enter a judgment of guilt. The report did not itself accept the plea, adjudicate guilt, or impose a sentence.

The recommendation rested on findings that no promises, threats, force, or threats of force induced the plea and that Pereira understood the consequences of pleading guilty, including the waiver of a trial and the plea’s immigration consequences.

Key Takeaways

  • Pereira pleaded guilty to illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
  • The magistrate judge found that the plea satisfied Rule 11 and was knowing, voluntary, and factually supported.
  • Acceptance of the plea, entry of judgment, and sentencing remain for the presiding district judge.

Why It Matters

The report documents the procedural safeguards used to ensure that Pereira’s guilty plea was valid, with particular attention to trial rights, sentencing exposure, and immigration consequences. It advances the prosecution toward judgment and sentencing but remains a recommendation subject to the district judge’s action.

The notice warns that failing to file written objections before sentencing may limit de novo review by the district judge and bar appellate review of factual findings later accepted or adopted.

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top